OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Prakash Kumar Singh Chauhan and Smt. Neelam Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U. P. and perused the record.

(2.) THIS application has been filed with prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 398 of 1997 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 427, 336, 323 and 504, I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 pending in the Court of learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

(3.) CONSIDERING the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the documents it appears that it is too old matter in which the charge-sheet was submitted on 5.5.1993 but the proceedings are still pending. The learned Magistrate concerned already taken the cognizance on the basis of charge-sheet submitted against the applicants. The State has directed for doing the further investigation to C.B.C.I.D. Thereafter the Investigating Officer of the C.B.C.I.D. moved an application before the learned Magistrate concerned for obtaining the permission of learned Magistrate concerned and handed over the case diary and stayed the proceedings. The learned Magistrate concerned who stayed the proceedings on 14.7.1994, committed a manifest error because it was not proper to stay the further proceeding after taking the cognizance. In case the learned Magistrate concerned has taken the cognizance on the basis of the police report, if it is transferred to some other investigating agency by the Government even after taking the permission from the Court concerned and the final report is submitted by subsequent investigation, it cannot affect the order of cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate concerned, it may be used for the purpose of the contradiction etc., at the stage of the trial. The learned Magistrate concerned had illegally stayed the proceedings on the basis of the application filed by the Investigating Officer for obtaining the permission for further investigation. The order dated 14.7.1994 staying the further proceedings was kept in law. Subsequently the learned Magistrate concerned has rightly issued the non- bailable warrant and process under Section 82, Cr. P.C. There is no illegality in issuing the non-bailable warrant and process under Section 82, Cr. P.C., therefore, the prayer for quashing the same as well as the proceedings pending against the applicants in the abovementioned case is refused.