Mr. R.S. Choudhary, for & Anr. v. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr.

Mr. R.S. Choudhary, for the petitioners. Mr. Aneesh Bhurat, Public Prosecutor. The present misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners challenging the order dated 12.01.2009 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Hanumangarh, whereby, the learned Special Judge after holding an enquiry issued show cause notices to the petitioners as to why a criminal case should not be registered against them and also directed the appointing authority of the petitioners to grant sanction for the prosecution of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that issuance of such a direction is not within the domain of the criminal court. Learned counsel while placing reliance on the decision in the case of Mansukhlal Vithaldas Chauhan Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in AIR 1997 SC 3400 submits that the criminal court has no jurisdiction to direct the appointing authority of the petitioners to grant sanction for the prosecution of the petitioners. Per contra learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the misc. petition and submits that in this case, the petitioners have prima facie been found responsible for making interpolation in the record of the summons sent by the court as well in the record of the police station. Thus, the direction for prosecution of the petitioners should not be interfered with by this Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned and considered the arguments advanced at the bar. The direction in the impugned order, whereby, the learned trial Judge has instructed the appointing authority of the petitioners to grant sanction for prosecuting the petitioners is absolutely unwarranted in view of the decision referred to above. Accordingly, the said part of the order of the learned trial court is quashed.

#2. However, this court is of the opinion that looking to the fact that an enquiry has been conducted in this case by the trial court in relation to the forgery committed in the official record, the direction to issue notice to the petitioners before registering the case also cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the said direction is also quashed. The allegations regarding the forgery in the documents is not after the documents were submitted to the court's custody. Thus, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Iqbal Singh Marwah and another Vs. Meenakshi Marwah and another, reported in AIR 2005 SC 2119, the requirement of the proceedings to be undertaken as per Section 195(1)(b)(ii) and Section 340 Cr.P.C. is not warranted in the case. Now, the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Hanumangarh is directed to instruct the SHO of the concerned Police Station to register a FIR and subsequent to registration of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer shall investigate the matter and file the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the competent court as per law. With the aforesaid directions and observations, this misc. petition is disposed of. Stay petition also stands disposed of. ms rathore (SANDEEP MEHTA), J.