JUDGMENT :

SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S.P. Tiwari, who appears for the State-Respondents.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is an accused in F.I.R. dated 10.04.2021 where the complainant Chandra Shekhar had borrowed Rs. 20 lacs in the form of Recurring Deposit from the petitioner for the purpose of investment in real estate. The load had also been admitted by him. The complainant instead of refunding the amount has falsely implicated the petitioner.

3. The petitioner filed a cross F.I.R.

4. The complainant had approached this Court in a Petition No. 4300 of 2021 which was dismissed by this Court on 11.02.2021 refusing to interfere in the F.I.R.

5. The petitioner approached the Investigating Officer annexing all evidence with regard to Video and Photographs taken on 29.07.2019 saying that money had been given to the servant of the complainant. The Investigating Officer did not take the same on record.

6. It has been argued that in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. (2008) 2 SCC 409 and Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and Others vs. State of Gujarat and Another, (2019) 17 SCC 1. The Supreme Court has observed that a fair and just investigat