Dharmendra Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 January, 2023

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dharmendra Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 January, 2023

Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti

                                1
 IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT JABALPUR
                          BEFORE
          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                   ON THE 20 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                   WRIT PETITION No. 180 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
1.    DHARMENDRA GUPTA S/O LATE SHRI JAYRAM
      GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
      BUSINESS R/O SHANKARGARH GUPTA BHAWAN
      MAKRONIYA SAGAR DISTRICT SAGAR (M.P.)
      (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    JITENDRA GUPTA S/O LATE SHRI JAYRAM
      GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
      BUSINESS R/O SHANKARGARH, GUPTA BHAWAN,
      MAKRONIYA SAGAR, DISTRICT SAGAR (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

                                                           .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI PRAMOD SINGH TOMAR, ADVOCATE )

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
      PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME
      VALLABH BHAWAN MANTRALAYA, BHOPAL
      (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD
      QUARTER BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.    SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SAGAR DISTRICT
      SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.    STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION
      M A K R O N I YA DISTRICT SAGAR (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SWAPNIL GANGULY, DY. A.G.)

      This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                                          2
following:
                                          ORDER

With the consent of parties heard finally.

The petitioner has filed this petition while praying for following reliefs :

i. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and specifically principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Jitendra Singh Narvariya Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in 2017 (2) MPWN SN 91 in which Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court has directed to the investigation authority to allow accused to submit all such information which may assist to arrive at the truth (2016) 3 SCC 135 followed contained in Annexure P/2 in the instant petition and pass the necessary order on the application of the petitioners.

ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be disposed of this writ petition in light of the Annexure P/3 by which this Hon'ble High Court has disposed of the separate petition by passing the said orders.

iii. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of this case, along with the cost of this writ petition be also awarded.

Learned counsel for petitioner contends that in the present case, a Criminal Case under Sections 302, 323, 294, 506, 147, 148 of IPC has been registered against the present petitioners.

It is contended by the counsel that the petitioners have no connection with the alleged offence and as the petitioners were not even present at the time of incident, therefore, they moved representations before the various authorities which are contained in Annexure P/1 and requested that a fair investigation while taking into consideration the CCTV footage be conducted. It is contended by counsel that in view of the law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in Jitendra Singh Narvariya Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in 2017 (2) MPWN SN 91 the respondents are duty bound to take into consideration the information which has been provided by the petitioner vide Annexure P/1 and, thereafter to conduct the investigation in accordance with law.

The counsel has further placed reliance on orders passed by this Court in various cases which have also been brought on record.

Per contra, Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Advocate for respondent submits that in the present case, the petitioner has not filed copy of FIR. The investigation is already being carried out by the prosecution agency therefore, the filing of this petition at this stage is premature.

It is also contended by the counsel for State that the petitioners are still absconding and therefore, any direction at this stage, will have bearing on the investigation which is being carried out by the prosecution. It is further contended by the counsel that the petitioners arrest is also necessary for a just and proper investigation and thus, while placing reliance on the decision of this Court in WP No.7744/2022 (Dr. Anand Rai Vs. State of M.P.) submits that no interference is required.

Heard the rival submissions.

In the present case, the petitioners are undisputedly being prosecuted for the aforesaid offences and the petitioners have not been arrested as yet. The matter is already being investigated by the prosecution. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merit, the petitioners are extended liberty to approach the Superintendent of Police, Sagar with an application afresh and the Superintendent of Police then take necessary measures to ensure just and fair investigation in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Jitendra Singh Narvariya Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in 2017 (2) MPWN SN

91. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and the Superintendent of Police, Sagar in his own wisdom shall be at liberty to deal with the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with 4 law.

This order shall not be construed as an order containing any direction to accept the petitioners application.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE Shub Digitally signed by SHUBHAM THAKKER Date: 2023.01.25 18:58:28 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court