Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 June, 2022
Author: Sanjay Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No. 12233 of 2022
(SARVEPALLI RADHAKRISHNAN UNIVERSITY HOSHANGABAD ROAD MISROD BHOPAL 462011 M.P. Vs
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 13-06-2022
Shri Sumit Nema, Senior Advocate with Shri Ayush Gupta, Advocate
fort he petitioner.
Shri Vijay Soni, Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4 on
advance copy.
Heard on the question of admission as well as interim relief.
Invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-
7.1 Respondents be restrained from harassing the petitioner University, its Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, officials, ex-officials, students, members of the parent Society, in the guise of investigation;
7.2 to hold that Telangana Police, i.e. respondent no.5&6 are having no jurisdiction to investigate in the state of Madhya Pradesh in regard to alleged crime, which has been committed at Hyderabad, Telangana;
7.3 respondents be directed to conduct fair investigation as per law and as per guidelines framed by Hon'ble Apex Court, time to time;
7.4 respondent no.1 be direct (sic.) to assure compliance of its statutory duty towards the petitioner University;2
7.5 Any other relief/relieves may be granted to the petitioner, as deem fit, to protect the interest of University.
The portrayal of root-cause as is articulated in the petition is that an FIR bearing No.61/2022 got registered on 14.02.2022 by the police of Police Station Malakpet, Hyderabad and another FIR No.79/2022 at Police Station Chaderghat, Hyderabad. Onset of offence has been based on ineluctable reason about disbursal of fake and fabricated mark-sheets/certificates of a handful of institution/Universities including the petitioner-University. In the pursuit of culprits, offence got registered against various persons but none of the officials of petitioner-University has been made accused. Lateron, the matter was transmitted to the hierarchy of respondent No.6 i.e. Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, where it got re-registered as FIR No.36/2022 dated 21.02.2022 and FIR No.44/2022 dated 28.02.2022. By these FIRs, offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 r/w section 34 of IPC has been registered.
Assertion of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a vexatious drive under the garb of aforesaid FIRs, is triggered by respondents No.5 and 6 which is causing undue harassment to the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, Ex-Vice Chancellor, students and officials of the petitioner-University. Of late, respondent no.6 summoned the Chancellor of the University who is nonagenarian and suffering from various clinical complexities. Of a further note, the respondents had also arrested Vice-Chancellor and Ex-Vice Chancellor of the petitioner-University for no good reason, despite they were not arrayed accused. They were produced before the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate for seeking their judicial remand, but the Judicial Magistrate Hyderabad culled any remand and also granted bail to them. According to the petitioner, the 3 police of Telangana State intruding into the University campus and also into the residents of officials of University and creating gut-wrenching atmosphere by unnecessarily harassing on one or other pretext. Relying on a decision in re Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and also upon a guideline issued by the Delhi High Court in re Sandeep Kumar v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors. rendered in W.P.(Cri.).No.2189/2018. Shri Nema learned counsel for the petitioner accentuates that the officers of the petitioner-University are not arrayed accused in aforesaid FIRs and under the garb of investigation, the respondents especially respondent No.5 and 6/police authorities of Telangana State cannot exasperate the employees of the University and should be thwarted from casting a slur to the reputed image of University by untimely intruding into the University premises. He sanguinely submits that the officers of the University are mere suspects and unless they are made accused, they cannot be harassed like anything and moreso, even after making them accused, as per law prevailing they should have been given prior notice.
Cogitating the overall facts and circumstances, I find apposite to hear the say of respondents No.5 and 6. Accordingly, let notice be issued to respondents No.5 and 6 on payment of process fee within seven days by RAD mode, returnable within six weeks.
By way of interim measure, it is directed as under- (1) The police authorities (including respondents No.5 and 6) of Telangana State henceforth will not intrude into the petitioner-University without prior intimation to its Chancellor.
(2) For further investigation, if any, only two police officers of Telangana State accompanied by a police officer, not below the rank of CSP of State of 4 M.P. will enter the University premises that too before getting a formal nod of Chancellor of the petitioner-University.
(3) If there appears any emerging occasion for making any University officials as accused in the alleged crime, then prior notice under Section 41-A of CrPC shall be issued to the concerning officers by respondents No.5 and 6.
(4) If respondents No.5 and 6 during the course of investigation need helping hands of any of the employees/officials of the petitioner-University, then by giving seven days prior notice they may be called and in that case, the petitioner-University shall provide all sort of assistance to respondent No.5 and 6 so as to complete the necessary investigation in the alleged crime.
(5) Respondent No.6 shall ensure and bear in mind that their action in any manner would not cause any opprobrium to the image of the petitioner- University inasmuch as till now no officers of the University has been made accused in the alleged crime.
(6) The petitioner-University shall also observe the ordain of this Court in proper perspective by extending full assistance to the Investigating team.
List this matter in the week commencing 25.07.2022.
(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE Sudesh Digitally signed by SUDESH KUMAR SUDESH SHUKLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, KUMAR 2.5.4.20=1d5e479f08e68eda8f9271dbbe2 c4bc3916264aec736f7c5f5885257f5eeae b7, pseudonym=70EE703D36E97ABB20BA3C 79C921929E09400A16, SHUKLA serialNumber=7D462390C18350EF7C408 11B12AB45D82AF1259878762BAC356DC FA877F02654, cn=SUDESH KUMAR SHUKLA Date: 2022.06.16 17:05:50 +05'30'