Honble SINGH, J.–Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. (2). This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the object of obtaining an order from the court that the Officer Incharge of the Police Station, Nagaur should complete the investigation relating to F.I.R. No. 14/95 dated 20th January, 95 expeditiously and file the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in the competent Court. (3). The certified copy of the F.I.R. No.14/95 of Police Station, Nagaur shows that the petitioner Mishri Lal submitted a report at the Police Station alleging therein that on 20th January, 95 at about 3 p.m. when polling was in progress, Bhanwar Lal and 50-60 persons armed with lathis, stones and knives, went to the spot and inflicted injuries with lathis and knives to the persons, who were sitting there. Those, who were involved in the causing of injuries included Nemichand s/o Sita Ram, Panwar Mali. It was alleged that Panwar Mali had a knife with which he inflicted injuries on the complainant Mishri Lal. The other persons namely, Ratana Ram, Pratap Ram, Sajjan Lal, and Ram Kishore also received injuries. Nemi Chand, Asha Ram, Prahlad Ram, Regar Ram, Bhiya Ram, Bhanwru, Puna Ram, Jhoomar Ram, Dana Ram, Panna Ram, Sardara, Bhanaram, Brij Bihari, Kamal Kishore, Bhanwar Lal, Kusal Chand, Jitmal and Babu Lal were named as accused persons. On the basis of the report submitted by Mishri Lal, the police registered a case under Sections 147, 148, 149,341, 323 and 336 IPC. (4). The grievance of the petitioner is that the police has not completed the investigation and has not submitted the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and therefore, the Station House Officer of the Police Station should be directed to complete the investigation and to submit the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. with- in a time to be fixed by this Court. (5). The crucial question to be considered and decided in this petition is whether the Officer Incharge of the Police Station, who is entrusted with the investigation of the case under the Code of Criminal Procedure, is under any legal obligation to conduct the investigation expeditiously and file the report under Sec- tion 173 Cr.P.C. without unnecessary delay or the Police Officer conducting investigation is free to take as much time as he likes in conducting the investigation. (6). (6). Investigation of a case by the Officer Incharge of the Police Station under Chapter 12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is a part of the public duty, which is required to be performed by the Police Officer posted at the Police Station. It is in the very nature of the public that the performance of the public duties is intended to serve some important public purpose. It is true that generally in the matter of investigation, the police is free to conduct the investigation in such manner as the Investigating Officer deems fit, subject of course to the supervision of the superior police officers and the Court in accordance with law. However, it cannot be ignored that the object of investigation is to find out whether the alleged offence was in fact committed and if so, who the offenders are so that those who are responsible for the commission of an offence may be sent for trial under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The ultimate object, namely, the trial of the offenders who are involved in the commission of any offence and imposition of punishment on them in accor- dance with law, in the event they are convicted, either on the basis of a plea of guilty or on the basis of findings arrived at after conducting a trial, cannot be ignored while conducting the investigation. Section 468 Cr.P.C. prescribes the period within which the cognizance of offence should be taken by the court in accordance with the provisions contained therein. This section prohibits the Court from taking cogni- zance after the expiry of period of limitation. If investigation of the case is unnecessary delayed and the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. is filed after the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed by Section 468 Cr.P.C. or any other special law for the time being in force, the very object of registering a case and investigating the case would be defeated. it is therefore, necessary that the offences which cannot be taken cognizance after the expiry of the period prescribed by Section 468 Cr.P.C., the investigation must be completed within the period of limitation so that the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. may be submitted before the competent Court sufficiently in time to enable to apply its judicial mind on the report and take cognizance of the offence, if there ground be grounds for adopting that course. (7). (7). Sub-section (5) of Section 167 Cr.P.C. is also important in this behalf. Sub-section (5) of Section 167 Cr.P.C. provides: ``if any case triable by a Magistrate as a summons-case, the investigation is not concluded within a period of six months from the date on which the accused was arrested, the Magistrate shall make an order stopping further investigation into the offence unless the officer making the investigation satisfies the Magistrate that for special reasons and in the interests of justice the continuation of the investigation beyond the period of six months is necessary. (8). A bare reading of sub-section (5) of Section 167 Cr.P.C. shows that the legislature intends that in the cases covered by this sub-section, the investigation must be completed within a period of six months so that the person,who has been arrested may not have to suffer unnecessary harassment and the proceedings against him may not become meaningless by the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed by Section 468 Cr.P.C. Keeping these two provisions i.e. sub-section (5) of Section 167 and provisions of Section 468 Cr.P.C., it is proper to infer that while conducting investigation, the police officer is expected to expedite the investigation and complete the same as early as may be possible and submit the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. within the period prescribed by Section 468 Cr.P.C. (9). In the instant case, the Public Prosecutor was directed to submit the report of the Superintendent of Police, but no report has been submitted so far. The report of the Investigating Officer was also required by the Court, the same has not been submitted. In the absence of the report of the Investigating Officer and that of the Superintendent of Police, this court is not in a position to say as to what were rea- sons for not concluding the investigation expeditiously. (10). In the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is partly allowed. The Investigating Officer of the Police Station, Nagaur is hereby directed to complete the investigation expeditiously and submit the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. keeping in view the principles mentioned in this order. The Superintendent of Police, Nagaur is also directed to look into this case and issue necessary directions to the officers subordinate to him for expeditious investigation of the cases and submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in Court without unnecessary delay. The Superintendent of Police, Nagaur is also directed to look into this case and issue necessary directions to the officers subordinate to him for expeditious investigation of the cases and submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in Court without unnecessary delay. The petition is disposed of accordingly.