- (1.) WE have heard Shri Tej Pal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Kr. R.C. Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 6 and learned AGA for the State.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the FIR in case Crime No. C -32 of 2005, under Sections 302/203, IPC registered at Police Station Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar. The charge -sheet dated 10 -3 -2006 was submitted by the police therein, on the basis of which, the Criminal Case No. 17209 of 2006, State v. Phool Kumar and Others is pending trial before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the proceeding of the aforesaid criminal case and directing the prosecution to get the case re -investigated by C.B.I. or any other agency. One Vipin Kumar was the worker of M/S P.K. Casting Factory Dada Nagar, Kanpur. On 6 -6 -2005, he was murdered by the factory owners and partners, namely Phool Kumar, Brijesh Kumar, Aditya Kumar and Ramesh by throttling. The information on telephone was given to the father of the deceased, namely, Ram Chandra Tewari by the owner of the factory that Vipin Kumar died due to electric shock. The police reached the spot and prepared the inquest memo in the light of the said information. The police was working on the basis that deceased died due to electric shock as informed by the factory owners and the then Investigating Officer was verifying that fact in his own way. But later on the complainant/informant came to know that his son was killed by the accused persons. The motive behind the murder was that there was some arrears of the pay etc. of the deceased. His marriage was to be solemnized in the near future. He demanded the arrears and some dispute took place between them and consequently he was murdered. The complainant/informant approached the police but his F.I.R. was not registered. Later on he moved an application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate concerned, by whose order the F.I.R. was registered and after completing the investigation, the charge -sheet was submitted. Not only this, the Court took cognizance on the charge -sheet and the trial is pending. The Investigating Officer has collected evidence about the involvement of the petitioner as well as other persons in this murder.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has alleged that the petitioner is a Government servant and he is neither owner nor partner of the said factory. But in the counter -affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer it has been clearly mentioned that being a Government servant, the petitioner could not be a partner nor owner of the factory in black and white, but he has invested the huge amount in the said factory and manages the same. The Investigating Officer collected reliable evidence about the involvement of the petitioner in the crime and submitted a charge - sheet.;