IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE, J.
Sutapa Adhikari and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 2464 of 2022
Decided on : 07-06-2023
Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Sections 160 and 482 - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 227 –Quash of criminal proceedings – Complaint that certain works which were done under Contai Municipality under development scheme are deceptive in nature -Petitioners alleged that the petitioners are the family members and have close acquaintance with the leader of the opposition in the state of West Bengal, who are being targeted by the ruling party being hand in gloves with the police administration for their association with the leader of the opposition -Held, Court Practice if adopted by investigating agency during investigation to call someone not named in FIR or not connected in any way in committing offence by a notice section 160 of the Cr.P.C and when the person concerned complies direction of notice investigating officer in name of interrogation implicate him as an accused and arrest him directly practice cannot be encouraged - Procedure adopted by investigating agency is not in conformity with provisions and object as laid down in section 160 of Cr.P.C. and also violative of principles of natural justice – disposed of
JUDGMENT :
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
1. Challenging the impugned notices dated 11.07.2022 issued to the petitioners herein under section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.) in connection with the Contai Police Station Case No. 46 of 2022, dated 31.01.2022, present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed. Petitioners alleged that the petitioners are the family members and have close acquaintance with the leader of the opposition in the state of West Bengal, who are being targeted by the ruling party being hand in gloves with the police administration for their association with the leader of the opposition.
2. Petitioners’ case is on 31.01.2022 a written complaint was submitted by the present opposite party no. 2, alleging commission of offence under section 120B/409/477A of Indian Penal Code, alleging interalia that certain works which were done under Contai Municipality under development scheme are deceptive in nature. It has been stated in the FIR that in the year 2017 and 2018 certain development and beautification works were undertaken at places in Contai town which were to be implemented by the Contai Municipality but it has been alleged that each work has cost crores of rupees which sounds illogical and unjustifiable. It has been further alleged all of such works have been documented to have been completed in the year of 2019, yet no work was done then. In fact actual repairing works that can be seen to have been done under the said municipality area, can no way match the expenditure cited by the agencies.
3. Petitioners contended that they came to learn that on the basis of said written complain, the investigation initiated against two persons namely Dilip Kumar Chouhan and Samir Kumar Dey. Said accused persons challenging the FIR, preferred Revisional Application before this court being CRR 414 of 2022 and obtained an interim order of stay of all further proceedings but the said revisional application was subsequently dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 17.05.2022. Such aspect raises questions in the mind of the petitioners. Petitioners contended in the above backdrop the investigating agency on the basis of aforesaid malevolent determination and in order to carry on a malafide investigation, which has been initiated on the basis of aforesaid written complain, having no legal standing whatsoever, has issued the impugned notices dated 11.07.2022 under section 160 of the Cr.P.C., in order to harass the petitioners and to carry on a spiteful investigation. Petitioners had given reply to such notice through their advocate and petitioners further submit that they are not at all acquainted in any manner whatsoever with the facts and circumstances of the case for the purpose of aiding the investigation and notices have solely been issued due to their proximity with the leader of the opposition and his younger brother. Petitioners contended that investigating agency is acting as per the whims of their political overlords and are conducting a spiteful investigation in this regard. They further submit that concerned documents are matters of record and the petitioner are nowhere acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the said case and notices herein are bereft of reasons and notices are illegal arbitrary unreasonable and prejudicial to the interest of the justice and as such are liable to be set aside.
4. Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in the garb of a notice under section 160 of the Cr.P.C. the investigating agency has arrested innocent persons on earlier occasion. In this context he referred judgment passed by this court in CRR 3047 of 2022 in connection with GR Case No. 1357 of 2022 arising out of Contai police station Case No. 265 of 2022 dated 29.06.2022, wherein one Alok Sahoo was taken into custody in connection with the said case adopting the same procedure. He further
Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2021) 2 SCC 427
Nandini Satpathy Vs. P.L. Dani and another Nand reported in (1978) 2 SCC 424.
SupremeToday
Under garb of Section 160 of Cr.P.C. a person unconnected with offence, cannot be directed to appear through notice under Section 160, for adopting short cut method of denying right of such person to....
The court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
A Police Officer making investigation may require attendance of “any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station ”, thereby, clearly and unequivocally setting limits to the jur....
The term 'adjoining station' in Section 160(1) Cr.P.C. can include a police station declared as a police station for an entire state, in relation to another police station declared as a police statio....
The term 'any person' in Section 160 of the CrPC includes persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, empowering the investigating agency to issue notices for their presence duri....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petition seeking advance notice before arrest/detention, without challenging the notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C., is not maintainable under....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.