Harpal Singh vs State of U.P.

A. B. Srivastava, J.—Heard the learned Counsel and the parties and perused the documents placed on record. This application can be disposed or finally on the admitted facts and circumstances. It appears that after chargesheet was submitted and cognizance was taken the documents were sent to the copying section for preparation of copies. Subsequently it appears that the first information report was lost despite several orders being passed by the Magistrate the same could not be traced and restored. The trial Court lingered the case for this purpose for a few years. It also appears that learned Magistrate has not proceeded in the matter in a time bound manner and this has resulted into trial being protracted. However, at this stage it is also not possible to quash the proceedings against the applicant unless an enquiry in accordance with rules in made by the learned Magistrate and findings be recorded, that the relevant documents including the F.I.R. has been lodged and report reconstructed.

As such the learned Magistrate is directed to hold an enquiry into loss of the F.I.R. and other connected records within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and in case he finds the documents to have been lost, the reconstruction of documents should be accomplished within a period of one month next. If reconstruction of the document within the period of one month is not accomplished, the Magistrate shall proceed to finally dispose of the case taking that the first information report and the other documents found to have been lost are not in existence and are not to be considered in evidence against the accused persons. The learned Magistrate shall finally dispose of the case Within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

With these directions, this application is finally disposed of. Appeal dispossed of.