R.C. Deepak and B.A. Zaidi, J.@mdashThe present criminal misc. writ petition has been filed by Mahendra Singh son of Sam Puarn Singh and Surendra son of Shankar both residents of D-5, Sector 31, Noida, district Gautam Budh Nagar praying therein to quash the first information report registered as Case Crime No. 838 of 2006 under Sections 363 and 366, I.P.C. pertaining to Police Station Sector 20, district Gautam Budh Nagar (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) and to direct the police authorities not to take coercive measures against them pursuant to the said F.I.R. or any suitable relief as the Hon''ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief relevant facts of the case, as disclosed in the impugned first information report, are that Deepika alias Payal is the daughter of Nand Lal son of Khakendra resident of C-233, Sector 19, Noida at present 35C/B-5, Mayur Vihar, Phase-III, Delhi. His daughter was in search of a job for herself and for her brother Amit and in regard to it she met Mahendra, the Petitioner, as the Petitioner is running his factory in Noida. The abovenamed Mahendra told her to come alongwith her bio-data on 7.5.2006 at his residence D-5, Sector 31, Noida, district Gautam Budh Nagar. Nand Lal received message through Mobile No. 9810098644 on his Mobile No. 9891115404 from Surendra, the servant of Mahendra and it was told that Deepika alias Payal should come at his residence at 4.00 p.m. Deepika alias Payal proceeded to the said place expressing to her father that she will return soon, but she did not return. Nand Lal started to make search of her daughter and also tried to have talk on abovesaid mobile number, but that was found switched off. He also talked to Mahendra on telephone, but he did not reply satisfactorily and cut the mobile phone, but told him to meet him after two days at his said residence. Since Deepika alias Payal was not traceable, Nand Lal approached the Incharge of Nithari Police Outpost and informed him in regard to the missing of his daughter, who told him that she would be searched. After two days, he went to D-5, Sector 31, Noida and met Surendra, the chowkidar of the house and enquired about his daughter whereupon he (Surendra) became disturbed and sent him back. It is alleged in the impugned first information report that Mahendra and Surendra have detained his daughter somewhere else and in this connection he met the Station Officer of Police Station Sector 20, Noida to lodge the report, but the report of missing only was registered. When he did not succeed in lodging the report, as required, he made an application dated 24.8.2006 u/s 156(3), Cr. P.C. in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar bearing Misc. Application No. 176 of 2006 and the Magistrate issued direction for the registration of the case. As a consequence, a case as Case Crime No. 838 of 2006 under Sections 363 and 366, I.P.C. pertaining to Police Station Sector 20, district Gautam Budh Nagar was registered referred to above.
3. On the petition this Court vide order dated 6.11.2006 directed the Sub-inspector of Police Station concerned to produce the above-named victim Deepika alias Payal, as there was no trace of her and the case was put up as fresh on 14.11.2006. Since the Sub-inspector could not trace out and produce the victim before this Court, the informant Nand Lal filed an affidavit dated 14.11.2006 mentioning therein that there is no trace of his daughter; that there is no fair and proper investigation into the case and the entire police machinery is in collusion with the accused. Considering the gravity of the offence and inaction of the then Investigating Officer, this Court vide order dated 15.11.2006 directed the Superintendent of Police, Gautam Budh Nagar to entrust the investigation into the case to a competent Police Officer not below the rank of Dy. S.P. and also directed that the Investigating Officer, so deputed, shall recover the above-named victim Deepika alias Payal and produce her before this Court on 20.11.2006. In compliance of the order dated 15.11.2006, the Superintendent of Police, Gautam Budh Nagar entrusted the investigation into the case to Ramesh Kumar Bharti, Circle Officer, City II, Noida, district Gautam Budh Nagar and in compliance thereof he appeared before the Court on 20.11.2006 and filed counter-affidavit wherein he submitted that he has recently taken over the charge of the investigation so some reasonable time be granted to him so as to enable him to recover the victim and produce her before the Court. As a consequence, two weeks'' time was granted to him and the case was directed to be listed on 8.12.2006. The informant Nand Lal filed supplementary affidavit dated 7.12.2006 alleging therein that the present Investigating Officer, i.e., the Circle Officer is also not fair with the investigation, as he has humiliated him and he is in collusion with the accused Mahendra and has made a prayer therein that the investigation into the case be entrusted to C.B.I. The case was taken up on 20.12.2006, the day the Investigating Officer was present and the case was ordered to be taken up on 5.1.2007 and the Investigating Officer was directed to produce the victim and file counter-affidavit indicating the progress into the investigation. The Investigating Officer Ramesh Kumar Bharti was present. The case was ordered to be listed on 9.1.2007.
4. Heard Sri Mahendra Prakash, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri Pradeep Pandey, learned Counsel for the informant, Sri Vijay Shanker Mishra, learned Government advocate and perused the record.
5. Learned Counsel for the informant submits that since there is no fair and proper investigation into the case and there is no traceability of the victim Deepika alias Payal, therefore, the investigation into the case be entrusted to C.B.I.
6. At this stage, Sri Vijay Shanker Mishra, learned Government advocate submits that the Government of Uttar Pradesh has entrusted the investigation of Case Crime No. 838 of 2006 under Sections 363 and 366, I.P.C. pertaining to Police Station Sector 20, district Gautam Budh Nagar and the relating matters to C.B.I., therefore, there is no purpose to keep the pendency of the writ petition.
7. We have considered the facts and circumstances of the case and we direct the learned Government advocate to file the copy of the order of the State Government entrusting the investigation to C.B.I. within 10 days.
The case shall be listed before us on 2.2.2007.
