PIUSH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner along with Mr. Nipun Bakshi, Advocate.

(2.) Heard Mr. Veer Vijay Pradhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party-State. Arguments on behalf of the petitioner

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dtd. 16/9/2011 as against the petitioner for alleged offence under Ss. 417, 418, 419, 420, 465, 466, 468/34 of Indian Penal Code is under challenge in the present criminal writ petition. He submits that the case arises out of complaint case which was sent for investigation by the police. Initially charge sheet was submitted and the cognizance was taken vide order dtd. 1/4/2004 against only two persons and the investigation was kept pending against the petitioner though the petitioner was named accused in the complaint. He submits that upon further investigation, the police submitted supplementary charge-sheet and in the supplementary case diary, there is no material against the petitioner. He has referred to the case-diary to submit that the first charge-sheet was submitted in the year 2004 and further investigation was taken up on 25/8/2010. The learned counsel has further submitted that since the charge-sheet was not submitted against the petitioner initially, it indicates that there was no material against the petitioner and in the supplementary case-diary, no further material has been collected to charge-sheet the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that the supplementary charge-sheet was submitted in the year 2011 after recording the statement of the petitioner and thereafter, cognizance was taken against the petitioner under the aforesaid Sec. .