- (1.) It would appear from the record that the arrest of the petitioners was stayed by an interim order passed in this writ petition. The investigation had not been stayed. It is not known whether the investigation has been completed yet or not. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) In the case of Mahendra Lal Das v. State of Bihar, reported in, 2002 SCC (Crl) 110, it has been held by the Supreme Court that while interference by Courts at investigation stage is not called for, the investigating agency cannot be given latitude of protracting the conclusion of the investigation without any limit of time. No useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending any longer. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: 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; 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;;