Mrinnal Dilip Nayak vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Held
The Court held that the prayer for a status report and the filing of a final report within three months is not maintainable. Regarding the direction for a fair and impartial investigation, the Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh And Others. The Court reiterated that Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. empowers a Magistrate to direct the registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation if the police have not conducted one adequately. The Court found no reason to issue directions for the reliefs sought by the petitioner. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as premature and misconceived.
Facts
The petitioner, Mrinal Dilip Nayak, a Munim for the Relli business family, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking a status report from the police, a fair and impartial investigation, and the filing of a final report within three months. The petitioner alleged that the Relli family used his bookkeeping and banking data, including GST-related matters, for tax evasion. He further claimed they manipulated his computer data to create false invoices for M/s Ankit Jewellers and fraudulently used his bank accounts. The petitioner also stated that the Relli family made a false complaint against him after he refused to be implicated in an Income Tax case. Despite the alleged criminal breach of trust and fraud, no arrests or chargesheets had been filed.
Key Issues
1. Whether this Court should direct the police to provide a status report and file a final report within three months, considering the petitioner's grievance regarding the investigation into alleged criminal breach of trust and fraud related to GST matters. (Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 / Section 482 Cr.P.C.) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the serious nature of the alleged crime and the involvement of officials necessitate a strict and prompt investigation by statutory authorities. He argued that prima facie, an offense is apparent from the data available. He relied on judgments in Mohd. Imran Khan Vs. State Government (NCT Delhi), Azija Begum Vs. State of Maharashtra, and Pooja Pal Vs. Union of India and others to support his plea for directions for a fair and impartial investigation. Revenue/State's arguments: The learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and sought the rejection of the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 528, Section 482, Section 156(3), Section 154(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER
This M.Cr.C. under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (section 482 Cr.P.C.) is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs: It is therefore most humbly prayed that prayed that status report from the police station be called and respondent authorities be directed to conduct fair impartial investigation in the matter and take action as per law and/or file final report before competent court with in three months any other order/direction may please be passed in nature of relief to the petitioner as the Hon'ble Court may be pleased.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner along with his brother Baklul serves as Muuneem to Gautram Rai Relli, Smt Priya Relli, Gulashn Rai Relli and Pratibha Relli, a renowned business family of Morar, Gwalior and as Muneem was performing works of
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.