BABEETA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicants for quashing the entire Criminal proceeding of Crime No. 48 of 2012 Sunita v. Babeeta and others, in Case No. 199 of 2012 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120B IPC P.S. Kotwali Nagar District Saharanpur. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. Record including the impugned order has also been perused.

(2.) The contention of the counsel is that the learned Magistrate has committed a fatal error of law while ordering reinvestigation into the case as he had no such power to adopt such a course. Submission is that the Magistrate was empowered only to order further investigation and not reinvestigation into the case. It has been prayed that reinvestigation into the matter shall adversely effect the rights of the applicant and therefore, must be stopped.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. Sri Vimlendu Tripathi has been heard on behalf of the State who stated fairly that the contentions raised by the applicant are substantially correct as it has also been held in Catena of decisions given by the Apex Court that Magistrate at the time of adjudicating upon the fate of the final report may choose a number of courses and one of the courses open to him is to direct further investigation. According to learned A.G.A. the use of the term "further investigation" in Apex Court's decision should be taken as the final word on the point of law and if the Magistrate concerned has instead of directing further investigation, ordered reinvestigation, the order shall be bad in law.