Shashi Bhushan Shukla vs Jai Traders
2023 Latest Caselaw 841 Chatt

                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                                     Order Sheet
                                              Cr.M.P. No.216 of 2023
                                Shashi Bhushan Shukla Versus Jai Traders & Ors.




09.02.2023           Shri Sumesh Bajaj along with Rishabh Bajaj, counsel for the Petitioner.

                     Heard on admission.

                     Admit.

                     Issue notice to the Respondents on payment of PF within a week, returnable

within 8 weeks.

Shri Devesh Verma, G.A appears and accepts notice for the State/Respondent No.7.

Also heard on IA No.02/2023, an application for grant of interim relief.

Issue notice to the said Respondents on this application also, as above.

Shri Bajaj submits that in the entire complaint, it has not been stated as to in what manner, the Petitioner has cheated the Complainant. He further submits that the Petitioner has paid the transportation charges to the husband of the Complainant i.e. Proprietor/Respondent No.5-Jai Archana Stores and the police has not taken cognizance and issued notice under Section 155 Cr.P.C but the learned Magistrate, without examining the case on merits, has forwarded the said application to the concerned SHO upon which, FIR under Sections 406, 408, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC was registered on 19.12.2022 vide FIR No.0577 at PS Balod, District Balod. He further submits that there is no allegation against him to constitute the offence and placed reliance on the judgment rendered in the matter of Usha Chakraborty vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIRONLINE 2023 SC 72. He further submits that the affidavit filed along with application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C has not fulfilled the requirement of the principles laid down in the matter of Priyanka Shrivastava and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, this Court only observes that in the present case, the concerned Investigating Officer shall strictly follow the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another reported (2014) 8 SCC 273, in which, it was emphasised that no arrest should be made only because the offence is non-bailable and cognizable and therefore, lawful for the police officers to do so and the said ratio has been reiterated in the matter of Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2022) 1 SCC 676, in which, it has been categorically held that on consideration of Section 170 of Cr.PC, it does not impose an obligation on the officer-in-charge to arrest each and every accused at the time of filing of the charge sheet.

Learned State Counsel is directed to inform the aforesaid observation to the concerned Investigating Officer for strict compliance.

Post the matter after 8 weeks.

Sd/-

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

Priya