HANEEF KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking direction of this Court to respondents to do fair investigation and enquiry by some senior officer of police or any other reliable agency into offence registered against the petitioner at the instance of Rajkishore Patel @ Raju.

(2.) It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that at the instance of Rajkishore Patel @ Raju Crime No.129/2016 under Section 8 / 20 of NDPS Act has been registered against the petitioner. A disclosure statement has been made by accused Rajkishore Patel that he went to bring Ganja at the instance of petitioner. He provided him with vehicle and asked registration papers and told him to meet a person in Orissa and bring Ganja bag. For each such trip he will pay him Rs.10,000/-. Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that petitioner Haneef was married to Mangla Patel whose religion was later on changed and she was named as Kaneej Fatima. She is a political person and very resourceful and powerful. After about 20 years of marriage differences has creeped in between Haneef and Mangla Patel. Haneef has also married a second woman. Mangla Patel @ Kaneez Fatima has lodged FIR against the petitioner under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code. It was submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that Rajkishore Patel, the main accused in the case is brother of Mangla Patel and at her instance complainant has taken name of petitioner and framed in the case.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid facts he has made a prayer that police authorities may be directed to conduct a fair investigation or to get the crime investigated by some senior officer or any independent agency. It is further submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that under Article 21 victim/accused has a right to fair investigation by impartial agency under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.