Through: Shri Aditya Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2788 UK

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
             AT NAINITAL
            Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1241 of 2021

Vikram Om Prakash Damani
and another.                                     ................Petitioner.

                             Through: Shri Aditya Singh, learned counsel
                             for the petitioner.


                             -Versus-
State of Uttarakhand
and others.                                       .........Respondents.
                             Through: Ms. Manisha Rana, learned AGA for
                             the State.
                             Shri Rakesh Thapliyal, learned Sr. Advocate
                             with Shri Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the
                             CBI.


            Date of hearing and judgment : 05.09.2022

Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

1. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking following reliefs:

"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding the respondent no. 1 and 2 to transfer the investigation to Central Bureau of Investigation in the FIR No. 0011 of 2020 at police station Rajpur, District Dehradun under Section 403, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120B IPC on 15.01.2020 inter alia against Directors of the TCFSL."

2. Petitioners themselves are complainants in the FIR. Petitioner no. 1 alleges that he has handed over the documents of title to his father and brother; his signature has been forged and a loan has been obtained in the name of M/s Eutopia Auto Private Ltd. showing him to be a guarantor in that loan. However, he has not executed any such document.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners were surprised by reading the contents of paragraph 20 of the objections filed by Tata Capital Finance Services Limited before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Allahabad in Regular Appeal No. 437 of 2019, arising out of Securitization Application No. 40 of 2019 with Debt Recovery Tribunal, Dehradun wherein the Authorised Officer of the Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. has stated in paragraph 20 that police officer has investigated the matter and come to the conclusion that complaint of the petitioners is baseless and irrelevant and final investigation report has been filed and the matter is closed.

4. Learned AGA for the State would submit that she has received instructions from the investigating agency that in the meantime, on 21.01.2021, the police have already submitted a charge sheet against the brother of the present petitioner no. 1 for the alleged commission of offences under Section 403, 420, 465, 471, 474, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

5. First grievance of the petitioners is that they have no knowledge of the submission of the charge sheet by the police.

6. Let copy of the charge sheet be supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners by learned AGA during the course of the day.

7. The second grievance of the petitioners is that the officials of the Tata Capital Finance Services Limited have not been made as accused in that case. This is not an issue, as this grievance can be redressed by the petitioners by taking recourse of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as and when, proper material comes against such officials of the Tata Capital Finance Services Ltd.

8. In that view of the matter, there is no need to transfer the investigation from the Civil Police, Uttarakhand to CBI or to any other specialized investigating agency.

9. With such observations, the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. All the pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.)

SKS