Vinod Prasad - (1.) NARENDRA Singh Bhadoriya, the applicant, who is Sub-Inspector of Police, has approached this Court under Section 482, Cr. P.C., through instant criminal misc. application, with the prayer that the impugned order dated 10.2.2009, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (N.D.P.S.) Act, Court No. 8, Meerut, in Case No. 83 of 2007, State v. NARENDRA Singh Bhadoriya, under Sections 166, 167, 195, 220, 323, 344, 504, 506 and 120B, I.P.C., read with Section 18/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Delhi Gate, district Meerut be quashed. By the impugned order trial Judge has rejected the discharge application of the applicant in the aforesaid offences.
(2.) IN the bird eye view, as are mentioned in the affidavit appended alongwith this criminal miscellaneous application, brief facts are that the applicant alongwith two other constables Shyoraj Singh and C.P. 315 Chob Singh arrested Rahul Maheshwari alias Rinkoo on 11.7.1999, under the N.D.P.S. Act. On the basis of the recovery made from the possession of the aforesaid person, F.I.R. of Crime No. 229/09, under Section 18/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, was registered vide Annexure-1, to this criminal miscellaneous application. According to the F.I.R. version, 200 grams of charas was alleged to have been recovered from the possession of aforesaid Rahul Maheshwari alias Rinkoo, on 11.7.1999, at 6.30 p.m. near Iqbal market, in front of the Buniyad Dry Cleaners Shop. The recovery was made by the present applicant, Sub-INspector Narendra Singh Bhadoria, who was on a picket duty at that moment alongwith Constable 315 Chob Singh and Constable Shyoraj Singh. During the investigation of the said F.I.R., statement of the applicant under Section 161, Cr. P.C., was recorded vide Annexure-2 to the affidavit appended alongwith this criminal misc. application, in which he has supported his version of arrest of Rahul Maheshwari alias Rinkoo alongwith the seized narcotic contraband. Constable Shyoraj Singh in his Section 161, Cr. P.C. statement has also supported the factum of arrest of the aforesaid accused. It seems that the family member of Rahul Maheshwari were convinced that the police had falsely implicated Rahul Maheshwai in the fake recovery of the narcotic substance, vide Annexure-1, to the affidavit appended alongwith this application, that they moved an application on the basis of which, the investigation of the said crime was transferred to C.B.C.I.D. vide order dated 14.8.1999, Annexure-3 to the affidavit, appended alongwith this criminal misc. application. It is averred by the applicant in his affidavit that the C.B.C.I.D. concluded the said investigation and submitted Charge-Sheet No. 35A against the applicant in the above mentioned offences vide Annexure-4 to the affidavit filed alongwith this criminal misc. application. It transpires that after submission of the charge-sheet, a final report was submitted by the C.B.C.I.D, in the arrest case made by the applicant and hence the applicant had filed a protest petition, vide Annexure-7, which is still pending consideration before the competent court.
(3.) HOWEVER, since the charge-sheet was filed against the applicant, he filed a discharge application, Annexure-8, to the affidavit appended with this criminal misc. application, before the Court of Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Meerut in the concerned Case No. 83 of 07, State v. Narendra Singh Bhadoriya. The discharge application filed by the applicant has been rejected by the trial Judge, by passing the impugned order dated 10.2.2009, which order has been challenged by the applicant Sub-Inspector in the instant criminal misc. application.;