BADRI NARAIN TEWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIRENDRA Saran, J. Badri Narain Tiwari is in Jail in connection with Crime No. 68 of 1992, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 506 and 120-B, I. P. C. of P. S. Mahoba Kanth, District Hamirpur.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the infor mant and the learned State counsel at length.

(3.) I have perused the case diary carefully and find that much that was required to be investigated in a case of this nature remains to be done. No effort appears to have been made to collect evidence, one way or the other, regarding allegations that Sri Yadav was in leaque with the criminals of the area and his connections, if any, with the accused of the present case. Investi gation on these points is only skin deep. When there were allegations against the Station Officer himself in all fairness the investigation ought to have been entrusted to some superior officer. The case diary shows that at one stage the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur had entrusted investigation to Sri Hira Lal, Circle Officer, Mahoba, but it was re-entrusted to Sri Shukla after some time. In the circumstances it was felt necessary to call for a counter-affidavit from the State. Sri Vikram Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur has filed counter-affidavit in which he states that Sri Shukla was entrusted with the investigation of the case on 4-5-1992. Hardly a couple of days had passed when he proceeded on leave and hence on 7-5-1992 the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur entrusted the investigation to Sri Hira Lal, Circle Officer. The counter-affidavit goes on to state that since Sri Shukla had reported back, the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur on 12-5-92 again entrusted investigation of this case to Sri Shukla. Annexure C. A.-2, filed with the counter-affidavit is the order dated 5-5-1992 by which Sri Hira Lal was entrusted with the inves tigation of this case. There is no mention in Annexure C. A.-2 that the investigation has been transferred to the Circle Officer because Sri Shukla was proceeding on leave. Curiously enough the order, by which the investigation was laken from the hands of Sri Hira Lal, Circle Officer and re-entrusted to Sri B. P. Shukla, has not been annexed with the counter-affidavit. The reason for this change is also not disclosed in the case diary anywhere. The explana tion given in the counter-affidavit of Sri Vikram Singh appears to be far from reality. I may also mention here that the trend of the counter-affidavit of Sri Vikram Singh is to put up a well determined opposition to the case of the complainant.