R.K. Dash, J. - (1.) The petitioner, a jeweler has filed. this petition praying that the Court in exercise of inherent power should restrain the police of Civil Lines Police Station, Allahabad to arrest him in S.T. No. 1149/99 arising out of case crime No. 330/99. It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that power and duties.of the police in the matter of investigation of cognizable offence are well set out in the Code of Criminal Procedure but the police of Uttar Pradesh have no regards for the laws enacted by the legislature and they follow their own procedure and harass and torture the public to suit their purpose. This case is a glaring example to show how the police by misusing their power are determined to arrest the petitioner and lodge him behind the bar alongwith his son. Elaborating his submission, counsel has urged that petitioner's, son was first arrested and taken to custody as a receiver of stolen property and for the self same offence the police have been trying to arrest the petitioner though in law they have no such power since because in the meanwhile, investigation has come to a close culminating filing of charge-sheet.
(2.) Taking into account the factual position and the allegations made in the petition, the Court by order dated 29.10.2001 directed the Senior Superintendent of Police, Allahabad to file an affidavit and answer certain questions formulated therein and pursuant thereto, he has filed the affidavit as directed. It is stated in the said affidavit that co-accused Gabbar made a statement to the police that he sold the alleged looted ornaments to the petitioner, owner Bedi Deep Jewelers and on his pointing some ornaments were recovered and the petitioner's son who was then present was arrested. it is further stated that petitioner's son disclosed that his father is involved in the sale and purchase of the alleged stolen ornaments.
(3.) On a conspectus of the above, what appears is that the prosecution case as against the petitioner is based on the alleged statement of the co-accused made before the police and if such statement, according to police, has an evidentiary value, it is astonishing why the petitioner was not arraigned as co-accused alongwith his son against whom charge-sheet has already been submitted. I refrain myself from making any observation as to the manner of investigation by the police since the matter is sub-judice and in the meanwhile, the petitioner has been arrested and for- warded to the Court. The sole prayer of the petitioner being to restrain the police to arrest him and the arrest have been effected, the present petition has become in- fructuous which is accordingly dismissed. Petition Dismissed.;