PANNA LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER dated 17.1.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala Cantt while directing the investigating agency to reinvestigate the case has been challenged by the petitioners by filing the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(2.) A complaint was filed by Ajay Sagar-respondent No. 2 to the Superintendent of Police on 22.6.2004, on the basis of which FIR No. 128 dated 23.6.2004 was registered at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt under Sections 407, 419, 420, 472, 473, 379 and 120-B against the petitioners. After investigation of the case, the police prepared a cancellation report, which was, thereafter, presented before the Magistrate. Accordingly, the Magistrate issued notice to the complainant, who filed a protest petition. After hearing the State and the complainant and after perusing the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. submitted by the police, the Magistrate came to a conclusion that the investigation had not been done properly, keeping in view the allegations of the complainant-party. The various facts which needed to be investigated by the police were stated in para-8 in the order dated 17.1.2005. The same reads as under :

(3.) IN the aforementioned case, the police had presented charge-sheet against the accused and after the Judicial Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence, the accused had also put in their appearance. It was at that stage that the Magistrate of his own ordered further investigation in the case. The facts in the present case are to the contrary. Here the police did not present charge-sheet against the accused, but submitted the cancellation report. After perusing the cancellation report and hearing the State and the complainant, the Court found it appropriate to order reinvestigation/further investigation. The various circumstances which needed to be further investigated were pointed out by the Magistrate in para-8 of the impugned order.