Judgment B.P.SINGH, J. 1. The petitioner, in this application, is an accused in G. R. No. 1077-A cf 1984 arising out of Bistupur P.S. Case No. 236 of 1984 under Sections 419 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The said case is pending before the Judicial Magistral, Jamshedpur (Respondent No. 2). 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the first information report was lodged on the 26th of May, 1984 and charge-sheet was sub-mitted on the 26th of July, 1984. cognizance taken on 16th October, 1984 under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, yet no steps thereafter were taken, and till today all that has been done in the proceeding is that adjournments have been granted from time to time without any cogent reasons. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has a fundamental right of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as field by the Supreme Court and affirmed by this Court in several judgments. The petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing of the charge-sheet submitted in the criminal case against him as also for issuance of an appropriate writ of certiorari or any other writ for quashing of the aforesaid prosecution which, according to him, is mala fide and vexacious. His further prayer is that with a view to speedy trial of his case, his trial should be separated and should be concluded as expeditiously as possible. 3. The petitioners grievance is that he is sought to be harassed in the instant case by and at the behest of the Investigating Officer of the case who happens to be no one else than his own first cousin with whom the petitioner and his branch of the family have property disputes. It is alleged that the said Investigating Officer, namely, Sri Ram Kumar Mishra, Respondent No. 3 herein, is behind the entire proceeding with the sole object of harassing the petitioner and members of his branch of the family to such an extent that they submit to the demands of Ram Kumar Mishra. 4. It is not necessary for me to go into various allegations made in the writ petition. According to the case of the prosecution, telephonic calls were made to Sri S. N. Pandey, Director of Industrial Relations. 4. It is not necessary for me to go into various allegations made in the writ petition. According to the case of the prosecution, telephonic calls were made to Sri S. N. Pandey, Director of Industrial Relations. TISCO purporting to be made by one Sri Hira Singh. Income-tax Commissioner, in which a request was made for providing employment to one of his nephews. Since Sri Pandey suspected some foul p1ay and fraud, he informed his security staff to be present when the person calling on the phone was called to receive the letter of appointment. In one of his conversations, he invited the caller to come and receive the apointment letter. On 26th of May, 1984, two persons came, and while one of them went inside and met Sri Pandey, the other accused kept standing near the gate. Since the security staff had already been informed both of them were immediately apprehended. The person who claimed to be the nephew of the said Hira Singh, Commissioner of Income-tax. disclosed his name as Rama Shankar Tewary. The other person disclosed his name as Raghawaji Singh. It is the prosecution case that this Ram Shankar Tiwary is not the actual Rama Shankar Tiwary but is the petitioner, namely, Krishna Bihari Mishra alias Brij Bihari Mishra. 5. It has not been disputed before us that the Investigating Officer of the case is the first cousin of the accused. It is also not disputed that there are property disputes between the two branches of the family. It is also not in dispute that Rama Shankar Tiwary happens to be the brother-in-law of the Investigating Officer (Respondent No. 3 herein). The allegation of the petitioner is that the Investigating Officer. Sri Rama Kant Mishra (Respondent No. 3 herein) finding his own brother-in-law. Rama Sh?nkar Tiwary. was involved in serious offence he. in collusion with his other brother-in-law, namely, Srikant Tiwary, who was then posted as Munshi in the Bistupur Police* Station, managed to release the said Rama Shankar Tiwary from the lock-up and in his place sought to implicate the elder brother of the petitioner, namely, Sri Ram Bachan Mishra. who was then Chief Engineer, Electrical of the Bokaro Steel Plant. Later on he again sought to change the name of the accused and sought to implicate the petitioner by describing him as Rama Shankar Tiwary alias Krishna Bihari Mishra. who was then Chief Engineer, Electrical of the Bokaro Steel Plant. Later on he again sought to change the name of the accused and sought to implicate the petitioner by describing him as Rama Shankar Tiwary alias Krishna Bihari Mishra. As to how the events took place can be well appreciated by referring to the observations of the learned First C.J.M., who in his order dated 11-6-1984 observed as follows .: "It is submitted by the learned counsel that the properties of Ram Ba.chan Mishra have been attached in this case but he is not an accused in this case. It is prayed that the officer-in-charge, Buxar, may be directed to release true properties belongs to Ram Bachan Mishra. From perusal of the case record it appeared that on 28-5-1384 the I.O. obtained W/A and process under Sections 82 and 83, Cr. P. C. against one accused Rama Shankar Tiwary but he having filed a petition on 12-6-1984 has reported that Rama Shankar was not the name of the accused for whose arrest W/A and processes were taken. He said that in course of investigation the real name of accused came to light as Ram Bachan Mishra. But surprisingly enough the I.O. has again said that accused is not Ram Bachan Mishra but Krishna Behari Mishra. It is added by him that Ram Bachan Mishra is own brother of accused Krishna Behari Mishra. It is further said by him that the properties which were seized in the name Ram Shankar may be treated that the properties have been seized the properties of accused Krishna Bihari Mishra. From consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of the case it appears that the I.O. has made hotch-potch of the entire matter. So, the properties in question seized and ordered to be released. If the I.O. desire he may obtain W/A processes under Sections 82 and 83, Cr. P. C. for the arrest of the real accused. In this manner, the petition of Rajendra Mishra is disposed of." 6. The allegations of the petitioner that the investigation is tained and that the Investigating Officer had a personal animus against the petitioner may be true, or may be, it is not true. It is not possible in this proceeding to express any specific opinion on the assertion of the petitioner in this regard. The allegations of the petitioner that the investigation is tained and that the Investigating Officer had a personal animus against the petitioner may be true, or may be, it is not true. It is not possible in this proceeding to express any specific opinion on the assertion of the petitioner in this regard. However, what is apparent is that the petitioners apprehension that the entire investigation of the case is mala fide and that he has been falsely implicated in this case on account of the animosity of the Investigating Officer, who happens to be his own first cousin, cannot be said to be baseless. In the instant case, I feel that the petitioner is justified in entertaining a reasonable apprehension that justice has not been done to him since he has reasons to believe that the whole case has been concocted against him by his own cousin with whom he is on inmical terms and who happens to be the Investigating Officer of the case. 7. The facts which clearly emerge out are that the Investigating Officer of the case is the first cousin of the petitioner. The fact that there is considerable tention between the petitioners branch of the family and that of the Investigating Officer on account of property dispute has not been controverted. It is also apparent that a person who was apprehended by the TISCO security stall gave out his name as Rama Shankar Tiwary. The said Rama Shankar Tiwary is the brother-in-law of the Investigating Officer. The elder brother of Rama Shankar Tiwary was also posted as Munshi in the Bistupur Police Station where this case was registered. It is also obvious from the record that initially the Investigating Officer sought to implicate the elder brother of the petitioner as an accused in this case. That elder brother happened to be at the relevant time Chief Engineer Electrical of the Bokaro Steel Plant. Later on, the case against the elder brother of the petitioner was given up by the Investigating Officer and instead he sought to be implicate the petitioner as an accused in the case by describing him as Rama Shankar Tiwary alias Krishna Behari Mishra. These are the facts which appear on record. Later on, the case against the elder brother of the petitioner was given up by the Investigating Officer and instead he sought to be implicate the petitioner as an accused in the case by describing him as Rama Shankar Tiwary alias Krishna Behari Mishra. These are the facts which appear on record. On the basis of these facts, the petitioner submits that he has been denied a fair trial since the cognizance is taken on the basis of the charge-sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer who was inimical towards him and who acted with a view to produce his own brother-in-law. The entire process of law was set in motion by such tainted and mala fide report. The entire prosecution is, therefore, vitiated and in the circumstances, the prosecution itself should be quashed in its entirety. 8. Taxing the totality of the circumstances, I feel ex debito justitiae it would be meet and proper that the matter snould be investigayed by an Investigating Officer who can be said to be disinterested, with the trial so that he may objectively deal with the material that he may collect in course or the investigation, or consider the material already collected by the earlier Investigating Officer. In the circumstances, there lore, I direct that the matter snould be re-investigated by a Police Officer not below the rank of a Superintendent or Polce. The said investigating Officer shall consider the materials already collected and may collect such materials as he may lind during the course of investigation, and on the basis of an objective appraisal thereof must submit his report to the concerned Court for taking action in accordance with law. 9. In view of the fact that the investigation has to be done afresh, it would be necessary to quash the cognizance already taken by the Magistrate by order datea 16-10-1984. Accordingly, I quash the order taking cognizance dated 16-10-1984 and direct that the Court shall proceed with the matter in accoidance with law alter receiving the investigation report of the Investigating Officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police as directed in the order, in. Accordingly, I quash the order taking cognizance dated 16-10-1984 and direct that the Court shall proceed with the matter in accoidance with law alter receiving the investigation report of the Investigating Officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police as directed in the order, in. view of the fact that the matter has already been pending in the Court for well-nigh three years, it is difected that fresh investigation should be completed within a period of one month from the date on which this order is communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur. It is, however, made clear that the Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur may investigate the case either himself or entrust the same to any other Police Officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. Alter the report of the Investigating Officer is submitted to the Court concerned, the Court concerned shall proceed in accordance with th provisions of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since the fresh investigation is being ordered by us by this order, it will not be open to the petitioner to raise the question of limitation, if any, in the matter of taking cognizance as it is at his behest that this order has been passed. 10. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with the direction that after fresh investigation the concerned Court shall proceed further with the case in accordance with law. S.K.JHA, J. 11 I entirely agree. Nonetheless, I wish to highlight two facts which have a great bearing upon the instant case. The ghost of Respondent No. 3 seems to permeate the atmosphere giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of the petitioner specially in view of the fact that even after his retirement Respondent No. 3 was sticking to the same place i.e. Jamshedpur and when a notice was issued to him through special messenger only a couple of days later, it was reported that he was treaseless and his whereabouts were not known. Is not then a suspicion bound to arise in our mind with regard to the conduct of Respondent No. 3 ? Where has he disappeared ? The second part of it is that the Respondent No. 2, Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, has been sitting over the trial even after taking cognizance on 16th October, 1984 without giving any reasonable or cogent reason. That is deprecable enough. Where has he disappeared ? The second part of it is that the Respondent No. 2, Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, has been sitting over the trial even after taking cognizance on 16th October, 1984 without giving any reasonable or cogent reason. That is deprecable enough. The liberty of a citizen of India cannot be put at stake for such a long period agonising his mind and in breach of the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Keeping these two particular facts in mind, the Investigating Officer, as has already been directed by my learned brother, will look into the matter objectively and come to his own findings and then submit a report within the stipulated period. That is why a responsible officer of the status of Superintendent of Police has been deputed for the purpose. Respondent No. 2 will be well-advised to act objectively and not to go on adjourning the case for no reason whatsoever from time to time and shall dispose of the matter with quick despatch, if at all cognizance is taken.