ADITYA SPONGE AND POWER Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RELIEF claimed in both the writ applications being same, both cases were heard together.

(2.) IN W.P.(CRL) No. 267 of 2006, the petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company and petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of the said company. In W.P.(CRL) No. 268 of 2006, the petitioner is an employee of the petitioner No. 1 - company in W.P.(CRL) No. 267 of 2006. Both the writ applications have been filed for the following reliefs: (i) F.I.R. No. 101/2006 dated 20.5.2006 registered in Nahan Police Station in the district of Sirmour in the State of Himachal Pradesh be quashed; (ii) A declaration be made that Nahan Police Station has no territorial jurisdiction to register and investigate into the F.I.R. lodged by one Rajkumar Saini, Managing Director, M/s. Saboo Ispat Pvt. Limited -opp Party No. 6; and (iii) To restrain Nahan Police Station in the State of Himachal Pradesh from investigating into the F.I.R. and also for quashing the notice in Annexure -6 sent by the In -charge Detective Wing, Nahan Police Station at Bhubaneswar dated 16.6.2006 under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the informant alleging supply of sub -standard materials by the petitioners and it is the case of the informant that the informant has been cheated. It is also the case of the informant that the materials were delivered in the factory premises of the informant located within the State of Himachal Pradesh and, therefore, the cause of action arose within the State of Himachal Pradesh. The learned Counsel appearing or the informant at the time of hearing also submitted that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the writ applications for the purpose of quashing the proceeding initiated in the State of Himachal Pradesh.