A.P.Srivastava, J. - (1.) This is an application under Section 561 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, The allegations with which it has been made are that the applicant is a public limited company which carries on the business of sugar factory in the name of New Saraswati Sugar Mills in Saraswati-nagar, thana Jahangirabad, district Bulandshahr. Certain disputes arose between the applicant and Sri Dwarka Singh, a Police Inspector of the Criminal Investigation Department, on account of which, it is the case of the applicant, Sri Dwarka Singh got offended. He therefore submitted a report to the District Magistrate of Bulandshahr and the latter authorised him to investigate into certain offences including the offences of cheating and forgery which were alleged to have been committed by curtain directors of that applicant company. In connection with that investigation an order has been passed by the District Magistrate of Bulandshahr, a copy of which is annexure 'E' to the petition. By that order, which purports to have been passed under Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the District Magistrate has directed the Post-master of Bulandshahr to "withhold" delivery of all letters, money orders, parcels or any other postal communication addressed to any of the two bogus firms (M/s Textile Traders Syndicate Ltd., Bulandshahr_ mentioned above till the decision of the case against these firms. These letters, money orders & parcels etc. may be shown to Sri Dwarka Singh, D.I, C.I.D., I.B., Agra, who is investigating the case". Another order, it is alleged, was passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Bulandshahr at the instance oi Sri Dwarka Singh on 28-5-1958. That order purports to have been passed under Section 523, Cr. P. C. and by it the Sub-Divisional Magistrate directed the Manager of the Punjab National Bank of India, Bulandshahr "to keep the balance of the date to the credit of these firms in your custody and not to pay it to any person till the decision of the case against these firms. The firms referred to were the same firms in respect of which the order under Section 95 of the Code had been passed.
(2.) It is contended on behalf of the applicant that Sri Dwarka Singh was not authorised in law to conduct any investigation and everything which he is doing is really without jurisdiction. It is also contended that the orders which have been passed by the District Magistrate and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Sections 95 and 523 of the Criminal Procedure Code are not justified by the terms of those Sections. The applicant therefore wants the entire proceedings as well as the two particular orders above referred to be quashed.
(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri Dwarka Singh in which the various allegations made against him by the applicants have been denied and it has been said that there were justifiable reasons for the action which Sri Dwarka Singh had taken and that the impugned orders were correct.;