R.N. Ray, J. - (1.) This petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code has been filed with two prayers.
(2.) And also for further prayer to issue a direction to the State of U.P. for not with-holding reappointment of service of the petitioner/applicant for period of two years i.e. from 1.12.92. So far as the second prayer of the applicant is concerned, which is not maintainable under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant, if so advised, may seek remedy in a proper constituted application under Article 226 of the Constitution. Hence the prayer for quashing the summoning order dated 24.11.92 and also for quashing the charge sheet dated 13.11.92 as referred to above are taken for consideration and order. Duly considered the submissions. It is submitted Satyendera Sharma is a responsible police officer and his service record is excellent and during his service career, the applicant has received several awards and certificates of appreciation and for his undaunted courage, devotion of duty, bravery and gallantry, he has been recommended even for the President Police Medal. The applicant was posted as Circle Officer at Bithur, Kanpur Nagar in the year,1986. On 19.10.86 Sri Vijai Bahadur, the then station officer arrested Aditya Kumar and Ram Dulare Under Section 151 Criminal procedure Code and recovered four idols from their possession, out of which one idol was of Surya Bhagwan, these idols were deposited in the Malkhana of the police station after making entry in the general diary of 10.10.86 through report No. 21. The aforesaid idols of Surya Bhagwan was found missing from the Malkhana of Police Station Bithur. As such the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur passed order for an enquiry which was conducted through A.S.P. Sri Javed who submitted his report on 19.12.87 and upon the enquiry report it was revealed that Vijai Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. Bithur and constable No. 1684 Rashid Ahmad were responsible for the removal of idols of Surya Bhagwan. On this report after obtaining the legal opinion from the Public Prosecutor, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur directed a F.I.R. to be lodged on 24.2.88 against Vijai Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. and constable Rashid Ahmad. Sri Vijai Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. Bithur, is the son-in-law of real brother of Sri Mulayam Singh Yadav, Ex. Chief Minister and leader of Samajwadi Janta party he got the investigation of the F.I.R. transferred to the C.B., C.I.D. Lucknow in the hand Sri J.N. Pandey Inspector C.B., C.I.D. Kanpur Circle who was in league with Vijay Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. Sri Pandey, Inspector, C.B., C.I.D. started writing Farzi statements of the witnesses as soon as this became known to the witnesses whose statements he was recording Farzi, they relate to affidavits in the court of the 15 C.J.M. Kanpur on 14.9.88 stating that they had not given any statement to Sri Pandey Inspector, and their statements were being shown recorded as by the Inspector in his own why that when the applicant came to know the aforesaid facts and of the collusive investigation being done by Sri Pandey, Inspector C.B., C.I.D. he made representation to the Dy. Inspector General of Police who on being satisfied, immediately took the investigation from Sri. Pandey and entrusted the same to Sri. Tyagi, Sector Officer, and the investigation was conducted honestly by him. However, in the meantime a complaint was filed under Section 379/400/120-B Indian Penal code in the court of the C.M.M. Kanpur Nagar by a prominent citizen Ajai Awasthi against Vijay Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. for the theft and removal of the aforesaid idols of Surya Bhagwan. In that complaint, statements of the complainant Ajai Awasthi were recorded on 2.11.1988 Under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code and statements of Bhagirath and Gajendrakhan were recorded under section 202 Criminal procedure Code and as such in the complaint filed by Ajai Awasthi, Vijay Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. gave an application that as the facts alleged in the complaint case were under investigation by the C.B., C.I.D. so the proceedings of the complaint case be stayed and the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur by order dated 7.11.1988 stayed the proceedings and directed the C.B., C.I.D. to submit its report in court on 7.12.88 As such the C.B., C.I.D. completed the investigation and in pursuance to the order dated 22.1.89 passed by Sri. G.S. Gangesh, S.P., C.B., C.I.D. I.O. Sri Ashok Kumar Tyagi prepared a draft final report for his signature in which it was found that the aforesaid idol of Surya Bhagwan was removed by Vijai Bahadur Singh Yadav, S.O. together with Rashid Ahmad constable and recommended for submitting a charge sheet against them. However, the C.M.M. Kanpur again passed an order on 23.3.89 directing the C.B., C.I.D. to submit a report of his investigation in the court by 6.3.89 when the applicant was going to be awarded President's Medals for gallantry and further extension of two years of service, S.O. Vijay Bahadur Singh Yadav exercised political pressure on the opposite party No.2 not to submit the final report (Annexure iv) in court and was making attempts to secure another report by some other I.O. in his favour in collusion with Shri U.B. Singh, legal advisor of C.B., C.I.D. and was openly saying that he would get the applicant arrested on the basis of the aforesaid F.I.R. In the meantime Sri Vijay Bahadur Singh Yadav succeeded in winning over to have favour of the officers of the C.B., C.I.D. and without recording any statement of any other witness of fact got a charge sheet dated 13.11.1992 submitted against the applicant on 24.11.1992 in the court of the C.M.M. Kanpur and that the C.B.C.I.D. illegally withheld the report (Annexure ix) about the filing of which there was a specific direction by this court in the aforesaid interim order. However, the C.B.C.I.D. did not give any reason as to why that report was not filed and why it was changed when there was no further evidence recorded. It is further submitted that the prosecuting officer C.B.C.I.D. Sri S.N. Srivastava submitted a note on the subsequent draft report on the basis of which charge sheet dated 13.11.1992 has been submitted. Heard learned A.G.A. Duly considered the submissions. This applicant should file a detailed objection along with an affidavit annexing therewith a copy of Annexure IX of this petition. If the said application is so filed within two weeks from this date and in that event the learned court below may call upon the police authorities concerned to produce the said document if at all that is in existence and thereafter the learned court below should provide with due opportunity to both sides after receipt of the same and proceed according to law. However until further order of this court further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 14830 of 1992, State v. Satyendra Sharma under Section 409/120-B Indian Penal Code of P.S. Bithur Kanpur Nagar, shall remain stayed. Copy be available to advocate within 2 days against payment of charges.;