SAXENA, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Sec. 482 Cr. P. C. has been preferred against the order dated 14. 10. 92 passed by the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Nawa, whereby he has rejected petitioners' application filed u/s. 173 (8) Cr. P. C. praying for directing the Investigating Officer to further investigate the matter in the light of the assertions made by them in the said application.
(2.) IN the instant case, the police after investigation submitted a challan against the accused persons including petitioner Rugha Ram for the offences u/ss. 148, 323, 325, 307, 302 r/w 149 IPC and against petitioner Shiv Karan for the offences u/ss. 147, 148, 323, 325, 447, 307, 302 and 149 IPC r/w sec. 299 Cr. P. C. in the court of learned M. J. M. , Nawa. During the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Magistrate, the petitioners filed an application u/s. 173 (8) Cr. P. C, which was dismissed by the learned Magistrate giving detailed reasons. It will suffice to mention that investigation of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the executive through the police department, the superintendence over which vests in the State Government. The Apex Court in State of Bihar vs. J. A. C. Saldanna and Ors. (1), has held that power of the police the investigate into a cognizable offence is ordinarily not to be interfered with by the judiciary. In J. A. C. Saldanna's case (supra), the investigation was pending, whereas in the case in hand, the police after investigation has already filed the challan in the Court of learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate has rightly held that even if the investigation has been conducted by the police in a slipshod and in a faulty manner, still then the Court cannot order for re-investigation of the case and that if certain accused persons were not present at the place of the alleged occurrence, such plea of alibi can be raised by them before the trial Judge. In my considered opinion, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is neither improper nor illegal nor unjustified and the same does not amount to abuse of the process of the Court and does not warrant any interference. In the premise of the above discussion, this petition is misconceived and merit less which is hereby dismissed. Petitioners shall, however, be at liberty to approach the Investigating Authorities praying for further investigation in accordance with law. .;