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

2021 Supreme(Cal) 276

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Kausik Chanda, J.
Anchal Adhikary – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of West Bengal and Another - Opposite Parties
C.R.R. NO. 18 OF 2021
Decided On : 25-08-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Arka Pratim Chowdhury, Adv., Ms. Saswati Chatterjee, Adv., Mr. Sunny Nandy, Adv., Mr. Shubha Pathak, Adv.
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Debasis Kar, Adv., Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury, Adv., Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Adv., Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Adv.

Point of Law : There is no bar on the part of the learned Sessions Judge to give direction for further investigation even in the absence of such prayer before him, if facts and circumstances of the case warrant such exercise of the power.

Headnote:

Penal Code, 1860- Sections 417/376/506/120B- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- Section 173 (5) – Further investigation by police - Charge sheet not filed in compliance with Section 173 (5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Does a Sessions Judge have the power to give a direction for further investigation upon the police if he is not satisfied with the investigation? If the Sessions Judge is empowered to pass an order for further investigation, at what stage such order can be passed Can the Sessions Judge exercise such power suo motu in the absence of any prayer made before him?

Finding of the Court : Once the case is committed under Section 209 of the Code by the Magistrate to the Court of Session, the Sessions Judge assumes unfettered original jurisdiction to take cognizance of an offence by operation of Section 193 of the Code. In exercise of such jurisdiction, a Court of Session if, after considering all relevant materials, finds that the investigation is incomplete, it may direct further investigation. Such power is implicit in the jurisdiction of the Court of Session to take cognizance of the offence - A Magistrate, therefore, can exercise the power to give direction for further investigation suo motu if the facts and circumstances of the case so warrant. Authority to direct further investigation continues till the stage of the trial commences and the trial commences only after the charges are framed - power of the Sessions Court to direct such further investigation can be exercised up to the stage of framing charges under Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and such power, in an appropriate case can be exercised suo motu.

Result : Petition disposed of

JUDGMENT :

In this revisional application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, Your Petitioner humbly prays that Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to direct the concerned authority and/or by some other investigating agency to initiate further investigation and give necessary reports afresh after an investigation in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time before the competent Court of Law in connection with Titagarh P.S. Case No. 10 of 2020 dated 04.01.2020 or may pass any other order or orders, direction or directions, rule or rules as to this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

2. The factual background in which the aforesaid reliefs were prayed for is summarised as follows.

3. A complaint was lodged by a de-facto complainant/petitioner before the Officer-in-Charge, Titagar Police Station, on January 04, 2020, following which the relevant Police Station registered an FIR on January 04, 2020, under Sections 417/376/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The relevant investigating officer submitted a charge sheet against the opposite party no. 2 within five days on January 09, 2020, under Sections 417/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. After filing the charge sheet, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, committed the case to the Court of Session, and the case was registered as S.C. Case No. 41 of 2020. The said case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, at Barrackpore.

4. The learned Sessions Judge fixed the hearing of the case on November 19, 2020, for consideration of charge when the learned Sessions Judge came to a finding that the charge sheet was not filed in compliance with Section 173 (5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as “the Code.” It was found that the charge sheet was not supported by any materials. The relevant investigating officer, as against the serial no. 11, had made no endorsement to suggest that nothing has been seized and relied upon by the prosecution. No medical report of the victim girl was to be found in the record. The learned Sessions Judge fixed the hearing of the case on the next date for an explanation from the concerned investigating officer.

5. On the next date, after hearing the investigating officer as well as the de facto complainant, the learned Sessions Judge, observed as follows:-

“However, this court is not on the issue as to whether the relevant materials were placed before the learned Magistrate at the time of taking cognizance of the matter, but it is high time to record that there is serious lapses on the part of the investing officer in not complying the provision of Section 173(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not proceeding for conducting the medical examination of the VG.

The investigation of this case under Sections 417/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, has not been concluded as per direction and of rule of law. The conduct of the investing officer in the matter of investigating this case appears to be doubtful having the effect of harboring the accused person, which warrants not only the invocation of the provision of Section 166 of the Indian penal Code, 1860 as amended but it’s a fit case in which the provision of Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, should be set in motion.

Let the copy of the order dated, 19.11.2020, along with this Order be sent to the Commissioner of Police at Barrackpore for taking necessary action before the matter is taking up for consideration of charge on 13/04/2021.

Accused person is to remain present. Prosecution is to take steps.”

6. The petitioner submits that the present revisional application has been filed against the perfunctory investigation carried out by the investigating agency. By referring to the representation dated October 22, 2020, to the Commissioner of Police, Barrackpore, the petitioner submits that her representation be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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