JUDGMENT :

N.S.Shekhawat, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 0471 dated 23.07.2024 under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC (Annexure P-24) registered at Police Station Gurgaon Sadar alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. After hearing the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, this Court has already issued notice of motion to the respondents in the main case and the main case is stated to be pending on 12th March, 2025.

3. During the pendency of the main case, the petitioners/applicants have filed the present application seeking directions to the State of Haryana/Investigating Agency not to take any coercive action qua the applicants/petitioners and its employees in the present case.

4. During the course of hearing, learned senior counsel has made detailed submissions on the merits of the case and contended that the FIR is in total contradiction to the provisions of Section 32 of the SARFAESI Act, which protects the officers and secured creditor from any prosecution. Still further, the FIR and all subsequent proceedings are blatant misuse of the process of the Court and are liable to be quashed by this court. Learned senior counsel has also referred to the merits of the case again, as submitted in the main quashing petition also. Learned senior counsel further submits that during the pendency of the present petition, the police officials are issuing repeated notices to the petitioners and other officials of the management, threatening to arrest them. Consequently, the Investigating Agency may be directed not to take any coercive action against the applicants/petitioners and its employees/officers/accused.

5. I have heard the submissions made by the learned senior counsel at length and perused the record.

6. The issue whether the order for not arresting or not taking any coercive action can be passed in the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pending investigation into the matter came to be considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and other 2021 SCC Online SC 135, wherein the Supreme Court has laid down the guidelines as thus 80 (i)...(xv) (xvi).....while passing an interim order in a quashing petition in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, an interim order of stay of investigation during the pendency of the quashing petition can be passed with circumspection. Such an interim order should not require to be passed routinely, casually and/or mechanically. Normally, when the investigation is in progress and the facts are hazy and the entire evidence/material is not before the High Court, the High Court should restrain itself from passing the interim order of not to arrest or 'no coercive steps to be adopted and the accused should be relegated to apply for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the competent court. The High Court shall not and as such is not justified in passing the order of not to arrest and/or no coercive steps either during the investigation or till the investigation is completed and/or till the final report/charge-sheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., while dismissing/disposing of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India".

7. Still further, similar issue again came up for hearing before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others and connected cases, 2024 AIR Supreme Court 1161; 2024(2) Scale 342, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:-

"21. This Court in State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and Others 2017 (2) SCC 779, while dealing with the contours of Section 482 and 438 Cr.PC had emphasized that the direction not to arrest the accused or not to t