SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 (1) Crimes 529
PATNA HIGH COURT
Choudhary S.N. Mishra, J.
Mohan Choudhary -Petitioner
versus
State of Bihar and others-Opp. Parties
Crl. Misc. No. 12911 of 1995
Decided on 24-11-1999
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner: Mis. J.P. Shukla, Sr. Advocate, R Kumar, Sr. Advocate, Abhay Kumar Singh. Mr. R.K. Shukla and Mr. V; Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P. P.

IMPORTANT POINT
Cognizance of offence under Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on basis of charge sheet submitted by Dy. S.P. who had not been appointed by State Government would be vitiated in law.

Headnote:Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3/1,3/2 and 7 - SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 - Rule 7 - Investigation carried by Dy. S.P. and charge sheet filed for offence - Challenged on ground that officer was not invested with powers to investigate - No letter of appointment produced to show that State Government had appointed by Dy. S.P. to investigate into the matter - Cognizance taken on such report was vitiated in law. (Paras 5 and 6)

       Result: Application allowed partly.

       

JUDGMENT

S.N. Mishra, J. - In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the investigation in Biraul PS case No. 56 of 1995 initiated on the basis of FIR for offences punishable under Section 302 and other ancillary sections of the Indian Penal Code including Sections 3 (1) and 3 (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Admittedly, after usual investigation final form has been submitted and on the basis thereof cognizance was taken of the offences punishable under Section 302 and other ancillary sections of the Indian Penal Code including Sections 311 and 3/2 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes- (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989 as stated above and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

3. Having regard to the facts stated above the prayer for quashing the investigation has become infructuous since the final form has already been submitted and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions. Mr. Shukla learned Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has then challenged the order of taking cognizance of an offence punishable under the provision of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the ground that in the instant case the Dy. S.P. has investigated the case and submitted the charge-sheet who was not vested with the power to investigate with respect to the offence. In support of his contention learned counsel has referred to Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 1989 which reads thus:

"7. Investigating Officer - (1) An offence committed under the Act shall be investigated by a police officer not below the rank of Dy. S.P. The Investigating Officer shall be appointed by the State, Government, Director-General of Police. Superintendent of Police after taking into account his past experience sense of ability and Justice to perceive the implication of the case and investigate along with right lines within the shortest possible time.

(2) The Investigating Officer so appointed under sub-rule (1) shall complete the investigation on top priority within thirty days and submit the report to the Superintendent of Police who in turn will immediate forward the report to the Director General of Police of the State Government.

(3) The Home Secretary and the Social Welfare Secretary to the State Government Director of Prosecution the Officer-in-charge of prosecution and the Director General of Police shall review by the end of every quarter the position of all investigations done by the Investigating Officer."

4. It is submitted that the State Government in term of the rule aforesaid has not issued notification appointing the Dy. S.P. to investigate the offence punishable under the said Act and as such the very investigation on the basis of which cognizance was taken under the said Act is vitiated in law. In order to appreciate the arguments of Mr. Shukla Section 9 of the Act is to be (sic) which reads thus:

"9. Conferment of Power. - (1) Notwithstanding anything - contained in the Code or in any other provision of this Act the State Government may if it considers it necessary or expedient so to do.

(a) for the provision of and for coping with any offence under this Act or

(b) for any case or class or group of cases under this Act.

in any district or part thereof confer by notification in the Official Gazette on any officer of the State Government the power exercisable by a police officer under the Code in such district or part thereof, or as the case may be, for such case or class of group of cases, and in particular, the power of arrest, investigation and prosecution of persons before any Special Court.

(2) all officers of police and all other officers of the Government shall assist the officer referred to in subsection (1) in the execution of the provision of this Act or any rule, scheme or order made thereunder.

(3) The provisions of the Code shall, so fa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top