AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The case diary has been produced by Mohammad Hussain, Head Constable.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
In the impugned FIR, there are allegations levelled against the petitioner that he has deterred the officials of respondent No. 2 from undertaking the execution of a duly promulgated order of demolition in respect of a building belonging to the petitioner.
A perusal of the case diary reveals that there are statements made by the officials of the Municipal Corporation, according to which they were deterred from carrying out the demolition on spot by the people who had gathered over there.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that when the learned Magistrate had sought report from the police at the initial stage of filing the petition under section 156 Cr.P.C., it was reported that no cognizable offense had taken place on spot.
In view of the material collected during investigation of the case which forms part of the Case Diary, it would be appropriate to permit the investigating agency to proceed ahead with the investigation of the case and ascertain in a fair and impartial manner as to whether any cognizable offence had actually taken place on spot, and if no, whether the petitioner is involved in the same.
Accordingly, Order dated 13.04.2022 is modified, and it is provided that respondent-investigating agency shall go ahead with the investigation of the case. However, if it intends to file challan against the petitioner, the same shall not be done without permission of this Court.
List on 16.09.2026.