Allahabad High Court
Keran Singh vs Ajay Mohan Sharma, S.S.P. on 29 April, 2014
Bench: Ran Vijai Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 40
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 122 of 2014
Applicant :- Keran Singh
Opposite Party :- Ajay Mohan Sharma, S.S.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikram Singh,H.M. Srivastava,V.D. Agarwal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- S.C.
Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh,J.
On 15.4.2014 the following order was passed by this Court.
"This Court on 10.3.2014 has passed the following order:
"Pursuant to the order dated 5.3.2014 the Investigating Officers namely Ram Siya Maurya and Sri Zamil Mohammad Rawat are present. Separate affidavits have been filed by them through Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned Standing Counsel. It has been stated by Sri Saxena that on the F.I.R. lodged by the opposite party at Police Station, Piluwa, the investigation is being made but despite best efforts the Investigating Officer has not been able to arrest the accused persons named therein i.e. the applicant and the family members. It is further submitted that the proceedings under section 82/83 Cr.P.C. has also been undertaken.
Sri V.D. Agrawal and Ms. Sandhya Agrawal, Advocates have filed an application on behalf of Sri Arvind Kumar son of Basudev Singh for being impleaded as applicant no.2, which has been seriously objected to by Sri Neeraj Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri H.M. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant. Apparently the objection raised by the applicant deserves to be sustained and there can be no impleadment of third party as applicant. However Sri Arvind Kumar can always be heard as an intervenor.
From the investigation carried out by the Investigating Officer of Police Station, Piluwa, it appears that serious efforts have not been made to arrest the accused persons. The Investigating Officer shall make serious efforts and to arrest the accused persons in the F.I.R. lodged at Police Station, Piluwa and further make serious efforts to recover the minor children of both the families.
List on 15.4.2014 showing the name of Ms. Sandhya Agrawal and Sri B.D. Agrawal, Advocates. On the said date the Investigation Officer of the Police Station, Piluwa shall remain present alongwith his affidavit of further development in the investigation."
Pursuant thereto an affidavit of Sri Roop Kishore NIgam, Senior Sub Inspector, Police Station Pilua, District Etah has been filed by the learned standing counsel informing the Court that the concerned Investigating Officer, nmaly, Jameel Mohammad Rawat is suffering from boil and due to ensuing Lok Sabha Election he has not been granted leave and as such, he can not appear before the Court. There is no medical certificate annexed along with the affidavit. Further, once this Court required the presence of the concerned Investigating Officer how he was not permitted to appear before the Court.
Senior Superintendent of Police, Etah is directed to ensure compliance of the order of this Court dated 10.3.2014 by the next date fixed. He is further directed to monitor the investigation entrusted to the concerned Investigating Officer and file his affidavit before this Court by the next date fixed about the progress of the investigation.
List on 29th April, 2014."
Pursuant thereto Sri Jamil Mohammad Rawat, presently posted as Station House Officer, Piluwa is present before the Court. A further affidavit of compliance has been filed disclosing the efforts of the Investigating Officer resulting non arrest and non recovery of minor children etc. The second part of the order has also not been complied with as the Senior Superintendent of Police, Etah (for short SSP) has not filed any affidavit who was directed to monitor the investigation and file his affidavit. Learned standing counsel states that the order dated 15.4.2014 was duly communicated to the SSP. In spite of filing an affidavit a comment has been sent by the SSP, Etah. It appears the SSP is deliberately avoiding the compliance of the order of this Court.
List this case on 12th May, 2014. On that date the SSP, Etah is directed to remain present before the Court along with his affidavit disclosing the further progress. Both the opposite parties shall also remain present before the Court on the date fixed.
Order Date :- 29.4.2014
samz
