Rajeev Misra, J. - (1.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Charge-sheet No. 461 of 2014 dated 6th September, 2014 submitted in Case Crime No. 847 of 2014, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Sector-20, Noida, District Gautam Budha Nagar and the Congnizance Taking Order dated 18th August, 2015 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar.
(2.) Heard Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Advocate along with Mr. Manoj Kumar Tiwari, the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Deeraj Singh Bohra, the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
(3.) From the record, it appears that the opposite party no.2 lodged a first information report dated 30th June, 2014, which was registered as Case Crime No. 847 of 2014, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. Police Station Sector-20, Noida, District Gautam Budha Nagar against the applicants. In the aforesaid first information report, it was alleged that the applicant no.1 Rakesh Kapoor has manipulated in the amount of claim payable to the opposite party no.2 for the loss suffered by the first informant i.e. the opposite party no.2 herein on account of accidental fire in the Consent Letter submitted by the opposite party no.2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid first information report, the present applicants filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11777 of 2014 (Rakesh Kapoor & Others vs. State of U.P. & 2 Others). The aforesaid criminal misc. writ petition came up for admission on 15th July, 2014 and a Division Bench of this Court passed the following interim order: "Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.1 & 2. Issue notice to respondent no.3. Six weeks' time is accorded to the respondents to file counter affidavit. Two weeks' thereafter time is accorded to file rejoinder affidavit. List after eight weeks. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that respondent no.3 Ashok Gupta is proprietor of M/s Digital World, D-21, Sector 6, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. and the said company is engaged in computerised digital fabric printing. It has also been contended that respondent no.3 had taken Standard Fire and Perils Policy for building, plant and machinery, furniture, fixtures and fittings and for stocks of fabrics and others items and it has also sought to be contended that a fire broke down and thereafter as per the terms and conditions of the policy that has been so taken, the claims has to be settled. Petitioner no.1 claims that he is surveyor of the insurance company and petitioner no.2 is the Divisional Manager of the insurance company. Petitioners submit that in the direction of settling claims, survey was undertaken, and survey cum assessment report has been submitted and pursuant to said survey report, respondent no. has been asked to complete formalities for release of assessed amount. Petitioners are contending before this Court that opposite party no.3 is not satisfied with the amount that has been so settled and only to exert pressure on the petitioners criminal forum has been choosen. Petitioners submission is that in case an incumbent is not satisfied with the insurance claim that has been so settled, then he can always approach the Ambudsman at Lucknow for redressal of his grievance, but certainly choice of criminal forum is not warranted in the facts of case. Prima facie, the arguments advanced appears to have some substance, accordingly pursuant to impugned FIR dated 30.6.2014 registered as Case Crime No.847/2014 under Sections 419/420/468/471/506/120B I.P.C. at P.S. Sector-20, Noida, the investigation may go on but the petitioners may not be arrested till submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., and the petitioners shall extend full cooperation in the investigation and shall not interfere with the ongoing investigation.";