Ram Raj Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Dayal Khare, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State Respondent.

The present 482, Code of Criminal Procedure application has been filed for quashing the proceedings of case No. 796 of 2008 u/s 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC (case crime No. 61 of 1982), P.S. Bakhira District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar and also for quashing the charge sheet submitted in said case crime number as well as for quashing of the order dated 11.8.2010 whereby it has been directed that pension and other benefits of the applicant be stopped and the applicant was directed to appear on 17.9.2010.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that in the year 1982 the applicant was posted as Station House Officer, police station Bakhira district Basti and one criminal, namely, Rudal Pathak, was murdered by another criminal Satya Narain, for which first information report was lodged. Initially the investigation was done by the Investigating Officer Audan Singh, who, after investigation, found that there was no complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence, however, on the order passed by Superintendent of Police, Basti, matter was again investigated by one Surendra Nath Singh, who, after investigation, also found that there was no complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence and submitted final report and still again investigation was transferred to C.B.C.I.D. and Harbansh Misra, Inspector, conducted the investigation and after investigation it was not found that the applicant was not involved in the alleged offence and report of Investigating Officer was submitted and charge sheet was filed against other accused persons. Still again matter was directed to be investigated by the order of S.P., C.B.I.C.D., Lucknow and one Khadak Bahadur Singh, Inspector, was directed to make investigation, who conducted the detailed investigation and found that the applicant was not even present at the time of alleged incident and was present at the concerned police station, therefore, submitted final report. It is also contended that when the matter proceeded to the court, during trial, an application u/s 319, Code of Criminal Procedure was moved to summon the applicant, which was rejected by the trial judge vide order dated 27.5.1983, copy of which has been filed as annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying application, which order was not challenged. It is further contended that the trial judge concluded the sessions trial No. 332 of 1982 and passed judgment and order dated 21.8.1986 convicting four accused, namely, Satya Narain alias Dingur, Sheo Narain alias Chini, Ganesh and Gauri. It is next contended that the against the said judgment and order dated 21.8.1986 a criminal appeal No. 2258 of 1986 was filed before this Court by the accused persons, which is pending consideration. It is further contended that while passing the judgment and order dated 21.8.1986, the trial court directed that the matter be re-investigated against Ram Raj Yadav, then then Station House Officer, police station Bakhira and to prosecute him. When the applicant came to know about the investigation being made against him, he filed criminal misc. writ Petition No. 4831 of 2003 before this Court, in which this Court stayed the arrest of the Petitioner, after taking note of the fact that various attempts have been made against the Petitioner to victimize him, copy of which has been filed as annexure-12 to the affidavit accompanying application.

Second supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicant has been filed today, which is taken on record.

In paragraph Nos. 4, 5, 10 and 11 of the second supplementary affidavit it has been averred that since the passing of the order by the writ court staying the arrest of the applicant, the applicant remain posted at various places but neither any summon or notice was served upon him, thus, he had no knowledge about the charge sheet filed against him. It has been further averred that after more than 37 years of the service the applicant retired in September, 2010 and when he visited to the concerned department for his pension and other retiral benefits then he came to know about the order dated 11.8.2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar directing withholding the applicant''s pension and other retiral dues.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that thereafter applicant, after collecting necessary papers, filed the present 482, Code of Criminal Procedure application, therefore, the present application suffers from no latches on the part of the applicant.

It is lastly contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the order for reinvestigation cannot be passed as per well settled principle of law as laid down by this Court as well as Hon''ble Apex Court.

Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2 returnable within four weeks. Steps be taken within a week.

Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. The opposite party No. 2 may also file counter affidavit within the said period. As prayed by the learned Counsel for the applicant one week thereafter is granted for filing rejoinder affidavit.

List after expiry of the aforesaid period before the appropriate Bench.

Till the next date of listing no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in case No. 796 of 2008 u/s 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC (case crime No. 61 of 1982), P.S. Bakhira District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar.