Anish v. State Of Haryana And Others

S.No.106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** CRM-M-46404 of 2021 Date of Decision:17.11.2021 Anish .....Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR Present:- Mr. Mazlish Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, DAG, Haryana.

**** SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL) 1.

FIR No.224 dated 12.10.2020, is registered at Police Station Pinangwa, District Nuh, Haryana, therein offences under Sections 25 of Arms Act, and, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341, 307, 506 IPC, are embodied.

2.

In the afore FIR, the petitioner is the informant and through the instant petition, he claims the relief, that since tardy investigations are being conducted into the FIR (supra) by the Investigating Officer concerned, hence, the investigations be handed over to NIS or to some other independent agency.

3.

Today, Mr. Chahar, learned State Counsel, on instructions meted out by the Investigating Officer, namely, ASI Mahesh, submits that the Investigating Officer concerned has arrested four of the accused and, has, thereafter proceeded to present a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C, before the learned Magistrate concerned. Furthermore, he also submits, on instructions meted to him, by the Investigating Officer (supra), that the investigation in respect of other co-accused, is also complete, and that the Investigating Officer concerned is likely to arrest them in a week. RENU 2021.11.18 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-46404 of 2021 -24.

In view of the afore intimations made to this Court, by the learned State Counsel, the allegations raised against the investigations, by the learned counsel, for the petitioner do not appear to be holding any vigor, and, nor are sustainable. Therefore, the afore prayer is not amenable for being granted to the petitioner.

5.

Be that as it may, a representation in respect of some threats being meted to the petitioner, by the accused concerned is sub-judice, before the authorities concerned, hence decision upon the afore representation, shall be made through a speaking order, and, within three weeks hereinafter. Disposed of.

November 17, 2021 ( SURESHWAR THAKUR ) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RENU 2021.11.18 14:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh