- (1.) Heard Sri K.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sajjad Hussain, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6 to 10, Sri R.K. Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) By means of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders dated 21.5.2015 and 12.9.2016 passed by respondent no. 2 so far it relates to keeping abeyance of the further proceedings of case crime no. 1278 of 2014 under sections 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C. and case crime no. 1497 of 2014 under sections 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act, police station Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur pending before the C.J.M., Balrampur as well as F.T.C.-II, Balrampur respectively as well as further interference of opposite party no. 2 in the investigation done by the C.B.C.I.D. in the alleged cases.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the informant of the case. She lodged F.I.R. of the present case against two accused, namely, Raghuraj and Vishnu respondent nos. 7 and 10 respectively and one unknown person. During the course of investigation offence under sections 120-B, 34 I.P.C. was also added. The accused Vishnu was arrested on 16.10.2014. After his arrest, his confessional statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer in which he has stated that he conspired the murder of deceased Umesh Pratap with accused Raghuraj, Uma Nath, Nand Lal and Rajesh Chauhan one week before the incident. He stated that as per the plan accused Uma Nath got himself admitted in Balrampur Hospital and he got himself arrested at Gorakhpur railway station in collusion with one Head Constable on 10.10.2014 and thereafter accused Raghuraj and Rajesh Chauhan committed the murder of deceased Umesh. He stated that there was enmity between the deceased, who was the husband of the petitioner and respondent nos. 7 to 10 for the last several years due to which the accused persons were trying to cause harm to him which resulted in the aforesaid incident. The investigation was conducted and after collecting the evidence against respondent nos. 7 to 10, the investigating officer filed charge-sheet bearing No. 03 of 2015 dated 13.1.2015 under section 302/34, 120-B I.P.C. before the C.J.M. Balrampur showing the arrest of respondent no. 10 Vishnu. Respondent nos. 6 to 9 were not arrested. As the accused respondent nos. 6 to 9 could not be arrested, the proceedings under section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. were initiated by the Investigating officer against them after taking permission from the C.J.M. Balrampur which was executed against them on the basis of said case. The accused respondent nos. 6 to 10 were also booked under the U.P. Gangster Act on 13.12.2014 for which a case was also registered against them as case crime no. 1497 of 2014 under section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act at police station Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur. The respondent nos. 6 to 10 and their family members have filed petitions, i.e., under section 482 Cr.P.C., writ petition, contempt petition etc. time and again and challenged the charge-sheet as well as proceedings under sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. on which various orders were passed by this Court. When they did not succeed in getting any relief Misc. Bench No. 10995 of 2014 was filed by father of accused respondent no. 9 and some persons in which the order was passed on 27.11.2014 and the said petition was disposed of with certain directions? and when the said directions were not complied with accused Jai Jai Ram and 15 others filed a contempt petition no. 2692 of 2014 in which following order was passed by this Court on 10.12.2014:- "These proceedings under Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act have been instituted alleging disobedience and defiance of the order dated 27.11.2014 passed by the writ court in Writ Petition No.10995 (M/B) of 2014 filed by the petitioners. The operative portion of the said order dated 27.11.2014 runs as under:- "A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State authorities and it has been stated that as on date there is no material against the petitioners nor they are being harassed by the police in any manner. The allegations to the contrary are false. In view of the stand so taken, we dispose of the present writ petition by providing that the petitioners shall not be harassed by the police unless of course there is some material collected by the investigating officer against the petitioners". Thus, the writ petition was disposed of by the writ court providing therein that the petitioners shall not be harassed by the police unless there is some material collected by the investigating officer against them. As to whether material has been gathered by the Investigating Officer to proceed against the petitioners or not is a question which cannot be decided in these proceedings instituted under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. Further, any interference in this matter will have an impact on the investigation. For the reasons given above, I decline to entertain the contempt petition which is hereby dismissed. However, if the petitioners have any grievance regarding police excesses, he may approach other fora available to him such as State and National Human Rights Commission. The accused respondent no. 9 Nand Lal along with co-accused has filed Misc. Bench No. 11197 of 2014 in which the present F.I.R. was challenged by them which was dismissed by this Court on 27.11.2014.";