JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vinod Prasad, J.—Petitioner Omveer is the first informant of FIR of Crime No. 302 of 2007, under Sections 302, 307, IPC, police station Bisrakh, District Gautam Budh Nagar. The said FIR was lodged on 2-12-2007 at 4.30 p.m. in respect of a murder executed on the same day at 1.45 p.m. The malefactors named in the FIR are Charan Singh, Sunder, Vijendra and Hoshiyar Singh. Luxman had died in the said incident whereas Yogendra had sustained serious injuries. 2. Registration of FIR engineered the investigation. Two of the accused Charan Singh and Sunder preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 2405 of 2008 for quashing of the said FIR and stay of their arrest and the matter to be get investigated by C.B.I. The said writ petition came up before us, which was dismissed on 28-2-2008 by observing that the charge-sheet has already been submitted and hence, the writ petition had become infructuous. 3. According to the case of the present petitioner, the aforesaid two accused, namely, Charan Singh and Sunder are influential persons and they, by using economic force, had earlier got the investigation transferred from police station Bisrakh to police station Kotwali Dadri from SSP Gautam Budh Nagar but even police of police station Kotwali Dadri submitted charge-sheet on 4-2-2008 being Charge sheet No. 14 of 2008 against them on which the cognizance was taken by CJM on 15-2-2008 and case No. 2114 of 2008 was registered against the charge-sheeted accused in the Court of C.J.M. vide Annexure 3 to the writ petition. 4. The accused persons, however, kept on threatening the informant and other people as except Hoshiyar Singh rest had not surrendered in the aforesaid crime number till date and therefore, the present petitioner was compelled to file Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 1679 of 2008 praying therein that the aforesaid accused persons of the murder charge be arrested. Since the accused persons had not surrender, the lower Court had also issued process under Sections 82, 83, Cr.P.C. but the police, according to the case of the informant petitioner, is not arresting the accused persons and executing the said process. 5. Since the accused persons had not surrender, the lower Court had also issued process under Sections 82, 83, Cr.P.C. but the police, according to the case of the informant petitioner, is not arresting the accused persons and executing the said process. 5. It was at this stage, that accused persons approached C.J.M. Gautam Budh Nagar praying for further investigation under Section 173(8), Cr.P.C. The said prayer of the accused persons was rejected by C.J.M. Gautam Budh Nagar vide his order dated 26-3-2008 vide Annexure 5 to this writ petition. 6. It was after that the accused persons approached the State Government, who vide impugned order dated 27-3-2008 transferred the investigation to SIS Ghaziabad vide order dated 26-3-2008. The said order which is Annexure 6 to this writ petition is under challenge before us. 7. Counter-affidavit has been filed by Government Advocate wherein it is averred that Shashi wife of Charan Singh made an application to the State Government for transfer of investigation and on her application the State Government on 26-3-2008 transferred the investigation from police station Bisrakh Gautam Budh Nagar to District Ghaziabad. A copy of the order dated 26-3-2008 has been appended as Annexure CA-1. It is further averred in the counter-affidavit that SSP Ghaziabad handed over the case to SIS vide order dated 27-3-2008. Vide paragraph 9 of the counter-affidavit it is averred that police has made all efforts to arrest the accused persons but they could not be arrested. However, this fact has been admitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted by the police against the accused persons. Vide paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit it is averred that after attaching the property under Section 82/83, Cr.P.C. that the charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Vide paragraph 11 of the counter-affidavit, it has been averred that further investigation of the aforesaid crime has been directed by the SSP Gautam Budh Nagar to be concluded expeditiously by police of police station Dankaur. Rest of the contents of the counter-affidavit indicates only this much that the investigation is now been conducted by SIS. 8. Vide paragraph 11 of the counter-affidavit, it has been averred that further investigation of the aforesaid crime has been directed by the SSP Gautam Budh Nagar to be concluded expeditiously by police of police station Dankaur. Rest of the contents of the counter-affidavit indicates only this much that the investigation is now been conducted by SIS. 8. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by learned Counsel for the petitioner in which he has reasserted the averments made in the writ petition with further averments that in matters of investigation the accused persons cannot be heard at all and the order has been passed in the teeth of law laid down by the Supreme Court. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment reported in 2007 (1) ACR 45, Tilak Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. 9. On such facts, we have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGA and perused the counter and rejoinder affidavits. 10. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is wholly illegal and has been passed only to shield the accused persons, who are now charge-sheeted accused of murder charge and are absconding and against whom there has been an attachment as well. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that it is day light incident and accused are in hands and clubs with the State Government that without assigning any reason that impugned FIR has been passed by the State Government when the Chief Judicial Magistrate has already rejected the prayer for further investigation. Learned Counsel further contended that there was no material before the State Government to have ordered for further investigation. Learned Counsel also argued on the application filed by Shashi wife of Charan Singh accused and contended that there was nothing in the said application moved by Shashi, which required further investigation. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a day light murder with an injured witness and eye-witness account and since the injured and eye-witness account have fully supported the prosecution version, there was no justification for the State Government to have passed the impugned order. He contended that the impugned order is bereft of any reasons and therefore, even the administrative power exercised by the State Government is absolutely illegal. He, therefore, submitted that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order be quashed. 11. He contended that the impugned order is bereft of any reasons and therefore, even the administrative power exercised by the State Government is absolutely illegal. He, therefore, submitted that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order be quashed. 11. Learned AGA on the other hand contended that since the wife of the accused had moved an application, therefore, the investigation has been transferred at the behest of the wife of the accused person and the State Government was satisfied and therefore, had transferred the investigation. 12. After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGA and looking into the record of the writ petition, we find that in this case the incident occurred in broad day light where Luxman lost his life and Yogendra sustained gunshot injury. This incident was witnessed by Omveer and other persons who had collected on the spot. It is admitted fact that charge-sheet has already been submitted against the named accused persons and but for Hoshiyar Singh rest of the three accused persons are still absconding so much so that charge-sheet has been submitted against them as absconder. The accused persons, therefore, could have appeared and raise their grievance before the proper forum. 13. The perusal of the application filed by the wife of Charan Singh accused does not indicate any cogent reasons on the basis of which further investigation was required. His application mentioned only earlier incident and the enmity. How and on what reasons the State Government came to the conclusion that further investigation is required is not born out from the impugned order. No reasons has been assigned by the State Government to give a latitude to the wife of the charge-sheeted absconding accused of a murder charge to have say in a matter of investigation. In our opinion, the impugned order seems to have been passed because of extraneous consideration and under political pressure. Learned AGA has also failed to point out any reason as to why investigation by SIS or any other agency was an indispensable necessity. The State Government was not excepted to give a long rope to the accused of a murder charge to remain absconding and not make him subject to the jurisdiction of the Court. Learned AGA has also failed to point out any reason as to why investigation by SIS or any other agency was an indispensable necessity. The State Government was not excepted to give a long rope to the accused of a murder charge to remain absconding and not make him subject to the jurisdiction of the Court. Since the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the accused never participated in the investigation and brought their version before the I.O. we fail to understand the reason why the State Government has allowed them to have a say in the matter when those absconding accused have got a scanty respect for the law. 14. There is much force in the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order has been passed only to shield the absconding accused persons and not to allow the trial to be proceeded against them. We also fail to appreciate as to why and on what reason the State Government allowed further investigation. 15. In such a view, we are of the opinion that the impugned order has been passed because of extraneous consideration by the State Government and follow up order by the S.S.P. and therefore, we quash the impugned order dated 27-3-2008 passed by SSP Gautam Budh Nagar in case crime No. 302 of 2007, under Sections 302, 307, IPC and also order by State Government dated 26-3-2008. We direct the Court concerned to proceed with the case forthwith after securing the presence of the accused persons. The accused persons would have full right to raise their grievance in the trial at the proper stage of framing of charge. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands allowed. ————