The court's decision emphasized the authority of the police to submit a supplementary chargesheet under section 173 (8) of the Cr. P. C. and the discretion of the Trial Judge to consider framing of charges under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 1 ) PARTIES are present before me through their learned Advocates. Heard them at length.

( 2 ) THIS is an application under sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure filed at the instance of the accused-petitioner, Shymal Guin and 2 others, seeking for quashing of the proceeding being G. R. Case No. 1942 of 2001 under sections 498a/406 of the Indian Penal Code and for setting aside of the order dated 25-7-2002 taking cognizance for the second time after the supplementary chargesheet under sections 498a/406/307 of the Indian Penal code was submitted.

( 3 ) THE short facts leading to the filing of this application are as under : the opposite party No. 2, Smt. Sonali Guin, lodged a petition of complaint on 21-11-2001 before the learned S. D. J. M. Serampore being C. R. case No. 396 of 2001 against the present petitioners alleging inter alia that her marriage took place on 19-11-1999 and a huge dowry was given during her marriage. But even thereafter the accused-petitioners started torture and the accused-petitioner no. 3 demanded Rs. 3 lakhs and for not providing the said amount, the opposite party No. 2 was also assaulted.

( 4 ) AGAIN, on 18-9-2001 the accused-petitioner No. 1 demanded money and it was refused by the opposite party No. 2 who was then assaulted by all of them. On 19-9-2001 she was kept hungry and thereafter due to increase of torture she fled away from the house.

( 5 ) AFTER the receipt of the aforesaid complaint, a criminal case was started against all these accused-petitioners being Serampore P. S. Case No. 396 of 2001 under sections 498a/406/307 of the Indian Penal Code. Police after investigation submitted a chargesheet only under sections 498a/406 of the indian Penal Code and the learned Magistrate was pleased to take cognizance of the offence on 18-3-2002. Thereafter on 10-7-2002 the Investigating Officer made a prayer for adding section 307 of the Indian Penal Code in the chargesheet by way of submitting a supplementary chargesheet. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 11-7-2002 allowed the said prayer for submitting a supplementary chargesheet and ultimately, by his order dated 25-7-2002 took cognizance of the offence for the second time under sections 498a/406/307 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 6 ) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order the petitioners herein have come up for quashing and/or setting aside of the said order.

( 7 ) I have heard the learned Advocates of both sides and also perused the impugned order itself.

( 8 ) A report under section 173 of the Cr. P. C. is normally the end of investigation. But the addition of sub-section (8) of section 173 of the Cr. P. C. has clarified that the sending of report under sub-section (2) does not preclude further investigation for sending supplementary report or reports. It is also equally true that notwithstanding a Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence upon a police report submitted under sub-section (2), the police can carry on repeated investigation on discovery of fresh facts. So, for filing a supplementary chargesheet under section 173 (8) of the Cr. P. C. it does not offend the provision of Cr. P. C. as the section itself authorises police to submit a supplementary chargesheet.

( 9 ) THAT being the position and upon consideration of the totality of the circumstances and the materials available before this Court, I am of the clear opinion that this is not a fit case where quashing of the chargesheet is available to the present petitioners.

( 10 ) ACCORDINGLY, I find no merit in this revisional application and the same stands dismissed.

( 11 ) LIBERTY is, however, given to the petitioners to take or raise appropriate plea before the Trial Judge at its appropriate stage with regard to framing of charge under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and if such plea is taken, the learned Trial Judge shall dispose of the same in accordance with law after hearing the parties.