IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Majafor Seikh - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others - Respondent
CRR. No. 2778 of 2019
Decided On : 13-03-2023
Revision - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 156(3) - 302, 120B, 34 I.P.C - 29.07.2019
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, alleging that the opposite party nos. 2 to 6 had killed his son. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the petition and dropped the case, citing the initial enquiry report which did not approve the allegations to be true.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the investigation had been conducted in a fair manner and the final report filed was in accordance with the law. The court concluded that there was no scope for interference in the order under revision, and any further indulgence shown to the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of court and law.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petitioner's complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the dropping of the case based on the initial enquiry report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the power to investigate is exclusively reserved for the police officers, and the High Court cannot change the investigating officer in the midstream and appoint any agency of its own choice to investigate a crime. The court also emphasized that the power to investigate must be exercised strictly in compliance with the provisions under Chapter XII of the Code.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision and found that the order dated 29.07.2019 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katwa, Burdwan, was in accordance with the law and required no interference.
JUDGMENT
The present revision is against an Order dated 29.07.2019 passed by the Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katwa, Burdwan, in M.P. 218 of 2019 (C.I.S.No.169/2019) (Mojoffafar Sk Versus Lovely Khatoon and four Ors) whereby prayer of the complainant was rejected and the aforesaid case has been dropped.
The petitioner’s case is that the petitioner is a Graduate and works as Tiles Mason at Mumbai and when the incident occurred on 22.06.2019, he was at B.M.C School near Gurudwara, Vilaroli – (E), Mumbai.
The marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 herein was solemnized as per the Muslim’s rites and customs and till date the said marriage exists. After marriage the petitioner and opposite party No. 2 were living their conjugal life and due to the wedlock two male children were born. The petitioner herein due to his work resided outside the West Bengal and as & when got leave came to his house and stayed there for two or three days. The opposite party no. 2 herein sometimes resided in the residential house of the petitioner and sometimes she resided in her parent’s house. When this was/is going on at that time on 22.06.2019 the petitioner got a telephonic call from his elder son who told him that his mother will kill him and also asked him to come. On getting the said telephonic call the petitioner came to his house and got an information from there that on that date the opposite party no. 2 herein beat her elder son mercilessly. The accused persons also beat his mother and also broke his elder sister’s hand. Thereafter, the opposite party no. 2 herein against the will of his elder son forcibly by beating him took him to her parental house. On that day the opposite party no. 2 over phone told the petitioner herein that her elder son was not found anywhere.
Thereafter from the village of the opposite party no. 2, one person informed over phone to the petitioner herein that his elder son has drowned. The petitioner then came to know that on date day the opposite party no. 2 had mercilessly beaten his elder son and thereafter by throwing acid burnt his face, forehead and hand and when he was in dying condition then to be sure of his death drowned him in the pond and murdered him. On that day the post-mortem was done at Katwa S.D. Hospital which has been registered as Ketugram Police Station under U.D. Case No. 31/2019 dated 22.06.2019. That it is the strong belief of the petitioner that the opposite party no. 2 with the help of other opposite parties killed his son. The petitioner informed the said facts with a registered letter to the Inspector in-charge, Ketugram Police Station and Superintendent of Police, Purba Burdwan but they have not taken any steps and for that the delay has also occurred.
That as the Inspector in Charge, Ketugram Police Station and Superintendent of Police, Purba Burdwan have not taken any steps about the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the petitioner herein filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 19.07.2019 before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katwa, Burdwan stating the aforesaid facts which has been registered as M.P. Case No. 218 of 2019 (C.I.S. No. 169 of 2019) against the opposite party nos. 2 to 6 herein.
On 19.07.2019 the learned Additional chief Judicial Magistrate, Katwa, Burdwan was pleased to pass the following order:-
“Complainant Mojoffafar Sk has preferred the instant petition of complaint accusing Lovely Khatoon and 4 others of the commission of offence u/s 302, 120B, 34 I.P.C and has prayed for a direction upon the I/C of Ketugram P.S. for registration of the same as F.I.R and for investigation. Complaint has also filed an affidavit swearing therein of non registration of any case on the self-same allegation as on this date.
Having considered the nature of allegation in the complaint, this court views it expedient to obtain initial enquiry report from the P.S. concerned before passing any furthe
Athul Rao v. State of Karnataka and Anr. (2018) 14 SCC 298
Amrutbhai Shambubhai Patel v. Sumanbhai Kantibai Patel (2017) 4 SCC 177
Bikash Ranjan Rout v. State through the Secretary (Home)
Bhagwant Singh v. Commr. of Police
Common Cause v. Union of India [(1996) 6 SCC 775 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 42 : AIR 1997 SC 1539]
Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 92
Randhir Singh Rana v. State (Delhi Administration) (1997) 1 SCC 361
Reeta Nag v. State of West Bengal and Ors. (2009) 9 SCC 129
Sivanmoorthy v. State [(2010) 12 SCC 29: (2011) 1 SCC (Cri) 295]
State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy (1977) 2 SCC 699
Vineet Kumar and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
The power to investigate is exclusively reserved for the police officers, and the High Court cannot change the investigating officer in the midstream and appoint any agency of its own choice to inves....
The court affirmed that magistrates cannot order further investigations post-cognizance without evidence of malafide, upholding the legitimacy of the charge sheet filed under Section 498A.
The Magistrate has the power to order further investigation even after cognizance is taken and accused appears, if the facts of the case demand so, in the interest of justice and to avoid miscarriage....
The court emphasized the necessity of fair investigation in criminal proceedings and clarified the powers of the Magistrate to order further investigation under specific circumstances.
A Magistrate cannot order further investigation after charges are framed; this power exists only at the pre-cognizance stage to ensure a fair investigation.
The court affirmed that thorough investigations were conducted, finding no deficiencies or evidence of foul play, thus denying the request for re-investigation.
The Magistrate cannot treat a case as a complaint after taking cognizance based on a charge-sheet; further investigation rights lie with the police.
Further investigation – Whether further investigation should or should not be ordered is within discretion of Magistrate who will exercise such discretion on facts of each case and in accordance with....
The Magistrate cannot retroactively classify a case as a complaint after taking cognizance based on an investigation report, as further investigations are solely under the police's purview without re....
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.