MC 1420/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. SARMA (Amitava Roy, J) Heard Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. B. Goyal, learned State Counsel and Mr. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel for Reserve Bank of India (Opp osite Party No.5). The instant application witnesses a prayer for impleadment of the Superintendent of Police, Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Assam as a respondent i n PIL No.33/2010. The applicant has stated on solemn affirmation, that meanwhil e, acting on a complaint submitted by it before the Superintendent of Police, Bu reau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Assam, alleging series of irregularit ies and embezzlement of funds by the opposite party No.6 to 11, the Inspector of Police, Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Assam had been instructe d to conduct an enquiry and that on the culmination thereof, a report had been s ubmitted on 04.01.2011. The applicant has further stated that acting on the sai d report, BIEO P.S. Case No.7/2011 has already been registered but the investiga tion thereof has been seriously impeded by the unwarranted interferences of the opposite party No.6 to 11. It is, in this factual premise that the leave of thi s Court has been sought for to implead the Superintendent of Police, Bureau of I nvestigation (Economic Offences), Assam to facilitate the required investigation in the aforementioned BIEO P.S. Case No.7/2011. While Mr. Goswami has urged that the impleadment as sought for would further the cause in the accompanying PIL No.33/2010, Mr. Bhuyan has maintained that as on date, neither there is any banking licence of the proposed Union Cooperative B ank Ltd. nor any application by it under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 is pe nding with it (Reserve Bank of India) and that the issue with reg-*ard to the is sue of permissibility of the conduct of its affairs is presently lying with the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Assam. When queried by this Court, Mr. Bhuyan has submitted that in the attendant fact s and circumstances, he has no objection to the impleadment of the Superintenden t of Police, Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Assam. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the p leaded facts in the accompanying PIL No.33/2010, we are of the view that the pra yer for impleadment ought to be allowed. Ordered accordingly. The Superintendent of Police, Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Assam is impleaded as Respondent No.13 in the PIL No.33/2010. The miscellaneous case stands disposed in the above terms.