Carzonrent India Private Limited v. State Of Himachal Pradesh
2018-03-01
DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY
body2018
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J —Heard. 2. The record discloses a very strange state of affairs as knowing fully well that all the accused have not yet been interrogated, the FIR has been sought to be quashed even well before the investigating agency is given due opportunity to conduct the investigation by associating all the accused persons. The Apex Court in its judgment dated 8.1.2018 has not only ordered to admit on bail the Managing Director of the petitioner-Company but also its other functionaries till this petition is finally disposed of. Therefore, when as per the status report placed on record today, accused Rajiv K. Vij has not yet associated himself with the investigation of this case, how the matter can be considered for quashing the FIR on merits at this stage. Let aforesaid Rajiv K. Vij appear before the I.O. of the case i.e. Station House Officer, Police Station, Kangra for interrogation at 11.00 a.m. on 17th March, 2018. The police to interrogate him and in case the interrogation is not complete to bound down him for next date or any other date(s) . The police may also summon any one else, if involved in this case and required for interrogation by serving him with ''Hukamnama'' under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. This being the position at this stage, it is not deemed appropriate to hear and decide this petition on merits. As pointed out by learned arguing counsel on behalf of complainant-respondent No.2 on the completion of the investigation in the event of some tangible evidence is found to be collected by the police, the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will be filed in the Court, and if not the police will file cancellation report. The accused-petitioner(s) will also have the opportunity to challenge the criminal proceedings against them at an appropriate stage in the event of report under Section 173 of the Code is filed against them in the Court of law or charge framed. The petition at this stage, however, is premature. 4. With the above observations, the petition being not maintainable at this stage is accordingly dismissed, leaving open the questions of law and facts raised therein to be agitated at an appropriate stage. Pending application(s) , if any, shall also stand disposed of. Dasti copy.