AMAR NATH MISRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 17th May, 1984, at 10.10 p.m. one Smt. Saroj, allegedly died. The matter was reported by Amar Nath Misra to the Police Station, next day morning. Another report about alleged murder of Smt. Saroj Devi was lodged on 21.5.1984 by Sitaram Shukla. Enough arguments have been made by Sri V.C. Misra, in support of this application under section 482, Cr. P.C., primarily containing the prayer that the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed. But the fact remains, that the matter has been taken cognizance of by the Magistrate on 9.8.1981. After complying with the provisions of law, the Magistrate committed the accused and the case to the Court of Sessions on 17.9.1987. Charges have been framed under sections 302/34/201, IPC and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, against all the applicants namely Amar Nath Misra, Smt. Yashwanti Devi, Surendra Pati and Bhupendera Pati.

(2.) At the outset it may be stated that Mr. V.C. Misra fairly conceded that in so far as Criminal Misc. Application No. 9679/85 is concerned, it has become infructuous. This other petition under section 482, Cr. P.C. was filed when the police had not submitted charge-sheet and the matter was pending investigation. The petition was admitted on 5.9.1985 and it was directed that while investigation was to go on, the applicants and the co-accused Rajendra Pati Misra, may not be arrested during the pendency of the said petition. With similar prayer the writ petition No. 1123/1985 was also filed. That petition was got dismissed as not pressed on 4.2.1987. Sri V.C. Misra argues that the charge-sheet having come, challenging which the present section 482, petition has been filed, the earlier Criminal Misc. Application No. 9679 of 1985 may be dismissed as infructuous. I direct accordingly.

(3.) Coming back to the merits of the present application, three main arguments have been advanced by Sri Misra: Firstly, the Investigating Officer who has ultimately filed charge-sheet did not have power of investigation flowing to him through the letter of the Government dated 17.7 1984, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on 22.9.1988. Secondly, two witnesses allegedly giving out statements under section 161, Cr. P.C. about the Dying Declaration have given wrong dates and the remaining 3 being related and inimical witnesses cannot be relied upon as their statements were recorded by the new Investigating Officer, after about one year of the alleged incident. Thirdly, that no offence is made out since final report by the ear Her Investigating Officer was submitted and no charge sheet has been filed against Rajendra Pati Misra, hence the proceedings against the applicants be quashed.