A Magistrate is entitled to take cognizance of an offense based on a petition of complaint and proceed with an inquiry under section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, even after receiving a police report under section 173. Additionally, a court may issue a warrant of arrest without filing a list of prosecution witnesses if adequate reasons are recorded.

Pradip Kumar Biswas, J.: This is an application under section 401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed at the instance of petitioner Ram Chandra Neogy and seven others against the opposite parties seeking to quash the proceeding being Case No. C-743 of 1987 and/or to set aside the order dated 2nd March, 1995 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah, 24 Parganas(South) issuing the warrant of arrest against the petitioners for their apprehension.

2. The short facts leading to the filing of this revisional application are as under:-

Petitioner Nos. 1 to 7 have their permanent residence within the jurisdiction of Manicktolla Police Station and the petitioner No.8 has his permanent residence within the jurisdiction of Burtolla Police Station in the metropolis of Calcutta.

3. During the later part of 1980 and even prior thereto, the area and/or the locality where the petitioners are residing was severly affected by incessant show of violence and vandalism by a person called Sri Hemen Mondal and his associates which included one Shri Ashok Kundu and several cases were pending against Sri Kundu and others.

4. That on 1st September, 1987 at about 23.25 hrs. Sub-Inspector of Manicktolla Police Station lodged an information at the police station stating inter alia, that in the company of the Assistant Commissioner(II), Eastern Suburban Division, Officer-in-Charge of section 01 and other police personnel he had been to Aurobinda setu around 9 p.m. and had found a mob of2000 strong persons assaulting a man and the members of the Assembly were variously armed the thereafter the assaulted person was put under a lorry which was parked there and the person suffered bleeding injuries, he was, however, rescued by the police personnel and admitted to NRS Hospital. On enquiry it was ascertained that Ashok Kundu, an associate of Hemen Mondal, who at about 20:45 hrs. was assaulted by an agitated mob. The information so conveyed by S.I. Sri S. Moitra led to the registration of Manicktolla Police Station Case No. 173 dated 1.9.87 under sections 148/149/307/427 of the Indian Penal Code against 2000 unknown persons and subsequently section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the said case.

6. On 21.9.1987 Smt. Sadhana Kundu, mother of said Ashok Kundu lodged a petition of complaint under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the ld. A.C.J.M., Sealdah allegaing, inter alia, that on 1.9.87 while Ashok Kundu with his sister was returning from his maternal uncle's house at about 8.30 p.m., a few persons dragged Ashok Kundu forcibly in an auto-rickshaw towards Aurobinda Setu. The sister of Ashok Kundu informed the complainant at their house and the complainant and her son ran towards Aurobinda Setu and subsequently found 14/15 persons were assaulting one person with lathi, rod, fists and blows etc. and the said person was lying on the ground. The lying man was crying for help and from the voice the complainant understood that he was her son Ashok.

7. It has further been submitted by her that the traffic came to a stand still position and shortly after police arrived and the persons who were assaulting Ashok left the place after talking to the police. The police removed Ashok to hospital and the complainant also followed them. Thereafter, it was informed to the complainant that Ashok had died. Since the complainant came to learn subsequently that no case was started by the police over the death of her son, Ashok, she filed that petition of complaint before the court. On receipt of the aforesaid petition of complaint, the A.C.J.M., Sealdah passed an order forwarding the aforesaid application to D.C.D.D., Lalbazar, Calcutta to investigate the offences treating the petition of complaint as F.I.R. under section 156(3) of Cr. P.C.

8. As a case had already been started, the said petition of complaint was amalgamated and got merged with that police case.

9. The information conveyed by