ABHINANDAN KAUSHIK Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The arrest of the petitioner was stayed by an interim order passed in this writ petition. The investigation had not been stayed. It is not known whether the investigation has been completed yet or not.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. In the case of 'Mahendra Lal Das Vs. State of Bihar' 2002 SCC (Crl.) 110 it has been held by the Supreme Court that while interference by Courts at investigation stage is not called for, the investigating agency cannot be given latitude of protracting the conclusion of the investigation without any limit of time. Having considered the lapse of time since lodging of the FIR, we dispose of this writ petition with the following orders:

(3.) This order will not come in the way if charge sheet is already filed. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.