Court reaffirmed that adequate notice must be given to informants, and judicial directions for investigation should respect the discretion of the police, ensuring procedural fairness.

JUDGMENT :

(SANDEEP KUMAR, J.)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

2. In this case, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 27.08.2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, IX, Patna, in Criminal Revision No.470 of 2019, whereby the learned Additional District Judge has set aside the order dated 12.07.2019 passed by the learned A.C.J.M.-XVII, Patna, by which the learned Magistrate has accepted the final form submitted by the Police. The petitioners have also prayed for staying the further proceeding proceedings in connection with Criminal Revision No.470 of 2019.

3. As per the F.I.R. the informant is the promoter-cum-director of Sea Vihar Fun Fair Private Limited, Patna (for short “the company”), which is registered with the Registrar of Companies since 21.09.2016. On 03.03.2017, the wife of the informant namely, Neelam Kumari, was also inducted as the Director of the aforesaid company and again on 23.03.2017, two more Directors namely, Kamlesh Kumar Singh and Upendra Kumar Sinha (petitioners) were also inducted as Directors of the said company. It has been alleged that both the petitioners have forged the signature of his wife i.e. Neelam Kumari on the bank loan papers and when this fact came to the knowledge of the informant, he along with his wife requested the Bank Manager not to allow any withdrawal from the account of the company but, despite the said request, the petitioners have colluded with the then Bank Manager of the Bank and withdrew Rs.5.5 crores fraudulently from the bank account of the company. It has also been alleged that later on, the informant came to know that the petitioners have connived and conspired with the Registrar of the Companies and removed the informant and his wife from the directorship of the company. It has further been alleged that on 09.08.2018 when the informant met the petitioners in the office of the petitioner no.1, he was threatened with a pistol and thereafter the informant was assaulted by the petitioners. During the assault, the petitioners also snatched the golden chain and golden ring from the informant. Accordingly, the present F.I.R. has been lodged.

4. After lodging of the present F.I.R., the Police investigated the case and found no substance in the allegation of the informant and thereafter, final form was submitted by the Police on 15.01.2019. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 12.07.2019 accepted the final form submitted by the police. Against the order of the Magistrate, the informant preferred Criminal Revision No.470 of 2019 before the learned A.D.J.-IX, Patna. The learned Additional District Judge vide impugned order dated 27.08.2021 set aside the order of the learned Magistrate and directed the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the informant and also to pass an order for further investigation on any point including the point of forging the signature of the informant’s wife if it be considered necessary in the interest of justice and for just decision of the case.

5. In this case, an Interlocutory Application No.1 of 2023 has been filed by the petitioners challenging the subsequent orders passed by the learned Magistrate after the impugned order dated 27.08.2021.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that for smooth functio