Allahabad High Court
Poonam Gupta vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 November, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 84
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10964 of 2022
Applicant :- Poonam Gupta
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Siddharth Niranjan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Siddharth Niranjan, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri.Munne Lal, learned A.G.A.
By means of this application, applicant has prayed for quashing the order dated 6.12.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge (Pocso Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, district-Etawah in Criminal Revision No.76 of 2021 (Smt.Poonam Gupta Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another) and quash the order dated 14.6.2021 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, district-Etawah in Case Crime No.5 of 2021 (State Vs. Dileep Katheriya and others) under Sections 411, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474/34, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Civil Lines, District-Etwah.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a bonafide purchaser of a Truck No.U.P.79/T-4031 and he has placed reliance on the documents annexed along with the application.
Applicant is aggrieved that an application to release the said vehicle which was confiscated during investigation in Case Crime No.5 of 2021 is rejected on the ground that investigation is still pending and there are allegations of forgery in the Registration Certificate and he has placed reliance upon a judgment of Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat (2002) 10 SCC 283.
In the present case, F.I.R. was lodged on 4.1.2021 alleging an offence that a diary was recovered wherein number of various vehicles including the vehicle in question was found and it was disclosed that its chasis number was changed, tampered and no objection certificates were issued from other states. Therefore, at this stage when the investigation is not concluded till date, to release the vehicle will not be in the interest of the investigation.
Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the order. However, there is another argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that some appropriate direction be passed to conclude the investigation expeditiously so that fresh application be filed which can be considered taking into consideration the judgment of Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai (supra).
Learned A.G.A. has no objection.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that any time bound direction be passed to conclude the investigation.
In these circumstances, without interfering with the impugned order, this application is disposed of with the direction to the Investigating Officer concerned to conclude the investigation in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 11.11.2022
SB
(Serial No.14 out of 694 fresh cases.)
