Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NOOR HASAN & OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Noor Hasan & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9910 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14947 (3 September 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 9910 of 2007

Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J.

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.

On 24.7.2007, the following order was passed in this case.

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the victim Sajida appears to have eloped with a boy named Nazar Mohammad. There is no allegation of sexual violence against the petitioners. Noor Mohammad is an old man aged about 60 years and the petitioner No. is his son. Similarly, there is no such allegation against the petitioners.

At this stage, learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, issue notice to respondent No. 3 returnable within four weeks for filing counter affidavit. The same time is allowed to the I.O. for the purpose.

List on 3rd September 2007.

The investigation into the Case Crime No. 472 of 2007 under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., P.S. Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad shall go on, but the arrest of the petitioners shall not be effected,provided they co-operate with the investigation."

According to the office report, notice by R.P.A.D. was issued to the opposite party No. 3 on 2.8.2007. According to the next office report dated 1.9.2007, notice has not been received back with or without service. No appearance has been put in from the side of the opposite party No. 3 and no counter affidavit has been filed by any of the respondents.

Having considered the lapse of time since lodging of the FIR, we dispose of this writ petition with the following orders:

(1) The investigation will be completed within three months of the date on which a certified copy of this order is presented before the Investigating Officer or any police officer of the district to whom the investigating officer is directly subordinate;

(2) The petitioners will not be arrested during pendency and for the purpose of investigation, provided a certified copy of this order is presented before the police officer as directed above within one month from today;

(3) If certified copy is not presented within the time aforesaid the stay of arrest will not operate;

(4) If at the conclusion of the investigation, a charge sheet is submitted instead of final report, it will be open to the Judicial Magistrate, if he decides to take cognizance, to summon the accused by summons or warrants in accordance with Section 204 Cr.P.C. after copies have been prepared for compliance with Section 207/208 Cr.P.C.

(5) If for any unavoidable reason, the investigation cannot be completed within the aforesaid time of three months, it will be open to the investigating officer to apply in this writ petition by means of a misc. application for enlargement of said time of three months by giving details of the investigation conducted during the aforesaid period of three months and also giving reasons why the investigation could not be completed within the time specified above;

(6) If the charge sheet is decided to be submitted to the Court of magistrate, in column no. 3 of the prescribed form of charge sheet, it will be mentioned that the accused have not been arrested on account of stay order granted by this Court;

(7) The accused will cooperate with the investigation and in case of non-cooperation or otherwise if the Investigating Officer is of the opinion that for any other valid reason the arrest of accused is necessary during or for the purpose of investigation it will be open to the Investigating Officer to apply in this writ petition by means of a Misc. application giving details of non-cooperation as also details of what kind of cooperation is expected by the accused for completing investigation or why the arrest is otherwise necessary so that interim stay of arrest granted hereby may be vacated.

Dated: August 3, 2007

AM/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.