ARUN MEHENDIRATTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUPPLEMENTARY affidavit filed is taken on record. Argument is that petitioners are bank officials and in good faith loan was sanctioned for purchase of car which was requested by the respondent no. 4 and the cheque for installment amount was dishonoured upon which bank has lodged complaint against the respondent no. 4 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and the forgery on the part of the respondent no. 4 is now clear from the fact that various cheques given by her were dishonoured and thus on these facts as and when the bank officials pressed for recovery of the loan amount first information report has been lodged against the bank officials to harass them. Be as it may, matter needs to be investigated. Accordingly this Court directs that till the completion of investigation and submission of charge sheet/final report as the case may be, or till the next date of listing whichever is earlier petitioners will not be arrested pursuant to the first information report registered at crime no. 273 of 2009, under Sections 384, 506, 504, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Hazratganj, district Lucknow. However, investigation in the case crime may go on to which petitioners shall co-operate. Issue notice to respondent no. 4. Steps will be taken within ten days. Learned A. G. A. has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no. 1, 3 and 4. Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned Advocate has accepted notice for respondent no. 2. All the respondents may file counter affidavit by the next date. List this case in the week commencing 25th May, 2009.