Madhya Pradesh High Court
Irshad Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr. on 18 April, 2016
1
R.P.No.56/2016 (Irshad Khan Vs. State of M.P., and others)
18/04/2016
Shri D.P.Singh, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri R.P.Gupta, Deputy Government Advocate for the
respondents 1 to 3, on advance copy.
This review petition is filed by one Irshad Khan s/o Shamshad Khan on the premise that W.P.No.649/2015 decided on 30/11/2015 was filed by one Navibaksha s/o late Shekh Abdulla without adding the review petitioner as party though allegations were made against him in the context of FIR which was claimed to have been got registered with Police Station, Thatipur, Gwalior and sought indulgence of this Court for expeditious investigation of the FIR in the light of the principle laid down in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2014) 2 SCC 1. It is submitted that complete facts were not placed on record. As a sequel to the order passed by this Court, petitioner and his family members are being harassed by the concerning police station for no wrong on their part as a result their status in the society has suffered serious set back. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, dispute raised by the petitioner - respondent No.4 was in fact and in effect of civil nature for which no criminal investigation is warranted. More over, on complaint of respondent No.4/petitioner, there was an order passed by the JMFC, Gwalior under section 156(3) Cr.P.C., for investigation on 06/07/2012 and the investigation is in progress. Hence, two parallel investigations are going on for a single act without any justifiable reasons. Therefore, the order passed by this Court deserves to be reviewed.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and order sought to be reviewed is perused.
While disposing of W.P.No.649/015 (supra), this Court had only passed an innocuous order and in fact petitioner therein was relegated to the Station House Officer seeking investigation into the FIR registered at crime No.880/2012 and no prejudicial order was passed by this Court. Hence, no ground is made out for review of the order. It needs mention that the dictum laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari (supra) is that the 2 R.P.No.56/2016 (Irshad Khan Vs. State of M.P., and others) concerning police is required to inquire into the complaint and thereafter it has to ascertain the nature of such complaint. If allegations contained therein are found to be that of criminal offence for which cognizance can be taken after the investigation then proceed further in accordance with provisons of Cr.P.C., Therefore, the review petitioner is always at liberty to approach the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior bringing to his notice the facts adumbrated in the review petition. If the petitioner approaches, this Court hopes and trusts that the respondent No.2 shall afford opportunity to the petitioner and after considering the submissions so advanced by oral or in writing shall take a final decision in the matter after hearing all parties, in accordance with law.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
(Rohit Arya) Judge b/-