Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shampa Dutt Paul, J.
Writuraj Sen & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of West Bengal & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 534 of 2019
Decided On : 24-01-2023
CRIMINAL REVISION - Quashing of Proceedings - Obstruction of Public Servant - Assault on Public Servant - Negligent Conduct with Respect to Fire or Combustible Matter - Negligent Conduct with Respect to Explosive Substance - Section 186, 353, 285, 286 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Police Personnel - Public Confidence - Police Protection - Abuse of Power - Police Misconduct - Screening Committee - Youth and Age of Candidates - Petty Crime or Misdemeanour - Caste or Hierarchy-Based Behaviour - Charge Sheet - Cognizance - Trial - Inherent Power of the Court - Legitimate Prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who are students, were charged with obstructing and assaulting police personnel while they were on duty to maintain law and order during Kali Puja celebrations. The police personnel seized chocolate bombs and kali patka from the petitioners, who claimed that they were falsely implicated and that the police personnel had assaulted them.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the materials in the case diary and the charge sheet made out a cognizable offence against the petitioners and that there were sufficient materials for proceeding against them towards trial. The court further held that the inherent power of the court should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners were falsely implicated in the case and whether the police personnel had assaulted them? 2. Whether the materials in the case diary and the charge sheet made out a cognizable offence against the petitioners? 3. Whether there were sufficient materials for proceeding against the petitioners towards trial?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Maharastra vs. Salman Salim Khan (2004) 1 SCC-525, which held that in a case praying for quashing of the charge, the principle to be adopted by the High Court should be that if the entire evidence produced by the prosecution is to be believed, would it constitute an offence or not. 2. The court also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Bihar Vs P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260, which held that applications against charge sheet and considering the matter on merit in the guise of prima facie evidence to stand an accused for trial, amounts to pre trial of Criminal trial. 3. The court further relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Prakash Singh Badal Vs State of Punjab, AIR 2007 SC 1274, which held that the ultimate test therefore, is whether the allegations have any substance.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the criminal revision application and held that the proceedings in the case should not be quashed.
JUDGMENT
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J. - The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceeding, being G.R. Case No. 3530 of 2017 pending in the court of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Barasat, District - North 24 Parganas arising out of Barasat Police Station Case No. 875 of 2017 dated October 22, 2017 under Sections 186/353/323/285/286/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The petitioner's case in short is that the petitioners have been unnecessarily arraigned as accused persons in connection with a criminal proceeding, being Barasat Police Station Case No. 875 of 2017 dated October 22, 2017 under Sections 186/353/323/285/286/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, without committing any act as narrated in the written complaint. The entire story of the complainant has been concocted only to save the act of atrocities by the police personnel, who assaulted the present petitioners.
3. That petitioner no.1 Writuraj Sen, is a student of Class XI at present.
4. Petitioner no. 2 Parvez Khan, is pursuing his studies at present from Bangabasi College of Commerce at Calcutta.
5. Petitioner no. 3 Subham Gayen, is a student of 1st Year of Government College of Engineering and Textile Technology at Berhampore, Mushidabad.
6. Petitioner No. 4 Baijoyonta Roy, is presently pursuing his studies at Barrackpore Rashtra Guru Surendranath College, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas.
7. The case of the petitioner is that on date of Kali Puja festival, the petitioners gathered together for celebrating Kali Puja with fire crackers on the roof-top of Banamalipur police quarters, when 5/6 unknown persons suddenly, came to the roof-top of the said police quarters and started assaulting the petitioners. Since the petitioners received injuries and were threatened by those unknown persons, the petitioners immediately came down and could know that the persons, who assaulted them are police personnels attached to Barasat Police Station. The respective family members of the present petitioner took them to the nearest Barasat S D Hospital instantly, where they were treated and released after preliminary treatment.
8. The present petitioners went to the concerned police station to lodge a written complaint against the said police personnels, but the petitioners were threatened with dire consequences saying that since the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are the sons of police personnel, the services of their fathers may be affected and they were forced to leave the said police station.
9. Subsequently, on a later date, the petitioners came to know through the mother of the petitioner no. 1 and the father of the petitioner no. 2 that a criminal case has been started on the basis of a written complaint lodged by one Sujit Kumar Dey, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police under Sections 186/353/323/285/286/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In the said written complaint it was alleged that on February 22, 2017 during (Plain Cloth) Mobile Duty (PCMD) in connection with Kali Puja festival, the Inspector-in-Charge under Barasat Police Station at about 19.47 hours received a telephonic information that some persons were using fire-crackers on the roof of 'F' Block at Banamalipur Police Quarter. They reached the roof of 'F' Block and found five (5) persons were using fire-crackers. Then disclosing their identities, they cautioned them to stop the nuisance. But they became furious and with hostile attitude, used abusive languages and obstructed him to do his public duty and also assaulted all of them and then they fled away from the place of occurrence.
10. On search they found two boxes containing 24 piece in each box total 48 pieces of chocolate bombs and 10 packets of kali patka containing 14 total 28 pieces in each packet and seized the same in presence of the witnesses and after seizure left for the police station.
11. The complaint was lodged on October 22, 2017 and within six (6) days, the Investigating Agency has completely its investigation and submitted charge-sh
AI
The inherent power of the court should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.
Public servants are protected under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code when acting within the scope of their official duties, and prosecution requires prior sanction if no malicious intent is....
(1) Investigation of non-cognizable cases – Even if police receives any such complaint relating to non-cognizable offence, police cannot start investigation without there being a green signal from Ma....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
