KANWARDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this order, we are disposing of C.W.P. Nos. 1485, 2488, 4202 and 4286 of 2002 filed by the petitioners for quashing FIRs No. 45 of 30.6.2001, 102 of 23.7.2001, 166 of 14.6.2001 and 222 of 13.6.2001 registered against them by different police stations in the State of West Bengal.

(2.) FOR the purpose of deciding the issue relating to jurisdiction of this Court to entertain these petitions, we may briefly notice the facts from C.W.P. No. 2488 of 2002.

(3.) IN their written statement, the respondents have averred that petitioner No. 1 has been evading his arrest for the last over six months who was granted an order of interim anticipatory bail for a period of four weeks on 5.11.2001 by the High Court of Madras in Crl. Original Petition No. 22234/2001. It is alleged that the aforementioned order was passed on a false averment with regard to an alleged case No. 192 of 2001 registered at police station Kotwali, Calcutta where the case is alleged to have been registered as well as the case itself are fake and non-existent. The interim anticipatory bail was granted on the basis of a report from the local police station of Chennai that no such case was registered against the petitioner. It is claimed that another order of anticipatory bail has been obtained by the petitioner in case No. 45, P.S. Dhaniakali on the basis of a false averment that he was present in Chennai and as such, was entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court of Madras. According to the respondents, the petitioners gave wrong addressees of the parties in the application filed before Madras High Court with an ulterior motive to ensure that notices issued by the Court may not be served. It is further averred that the Calcutta High Court on 3.12.2001, has already dismissed a petition for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner in case FIR No. 222, P.S. Behala. The learned District and Sessions Judge, Barasat has also dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 102, P.S. Airport in respect of which the present petition for quashing has been filed. The orders of Madras High Court, Calcutta High Court as well as the learned District and Sessions Judge, Barasat have been placed on record as Annexures R.1 to R.3. The respondents have further asserted that no cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this High Court and as such, these petitions cannot be entertained. Respondents No. 1 to 3 have further averred that all the Directors of the Company have been evading arrest and have escaped the police dragnet. It is claimed that many of the Directors have fled out of the country to evade arrest and despite the fact that the Investigating Agency has procured warrants of arrest from the competent court of jurisdiction against the petitioner and others none out of eight of the persons including the petitioner could be arrested and to nab them, the Investigating Agency has also obtained the services of the Interpol Wing of the CBI for execution of the warrants of arrest.