Back
2024 Supreme(Cal) 44
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Nityananda Chatterjee @ Nitai - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Another
- Respondent
CRR. No. 1575 of 2020 with CRAN 1 of 2021
Decided On : 08-02-2024
For the Petitioner:Phiroz Edulji, Roustavi Mukherjee, Rajnandini Das, Soumali Choudhury, Advocates. For the Respondents:Sudip Ghosh, Sujata Das. Advocates.
The judgment emphasizes the necessity to establish instigation or conspiracy for the offense of abetment and underscores the importance of freedom of speech and expression within reasonable restrictions.
Headnote:
Abetment - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 115, Section 505(1)(b)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was accused of spreading hate-mongering rumors with the intention to harm a local political leader. The petitioner's licensed arms and mobile phone were seized, and his arms license was revoked. The petitioner claimed that the accusations were due to differences of opinion within the political party.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no prima facie case against the petitioner for the alleged offenses under Section 115 and Section 505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code. The court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged abetment of an offense and statements conducing to public mischief, leading to the seizure of the petitioner's arms and mobile phone, and the revocation of his arms license.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for the offense of abetment, it is essential to prove instigation or conspiracy, which was not established in this case. Additionally, the court highlighted the importance of freedom of speech and expression, subject to reasonable restrictions.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revision, quashed the proceedings against the petitioner, and directed compliance with necessary legal formalities.
JUDGMENT
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of proceedings being Ausgram Police Station Case No. 298/2020 dated 22.09.2020 under Sections 115/505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (corresponding to G. R. No. 3179/2020), now pending before the Court of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purba Bardhaman.
2. FACTS:-
The petitioner states that one Sk. Sujauddin (hereinafter referred to as the “informant”) lodged a complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Ausgram Police Station, alleging that:–
A few days prior to the lodging of the complaint, hate-mongering rumours had been spread with an intention to kill the local AITMC leader, Anubrata Mondal @ Keshto. In fact, the informant came across a voice message, in which a person called Nitai Chatterjee was found to be instigating to kill Anubrata Mondal @ Keshto and extort money. Subsequently, the informant and his associates gathered information and came to learn that the petitioner, who is otherwise a dangerous man, had spread such inflammatory rumours. The petitioner has previously been implicated in several Criminal cases. Consequently, the informant suspected that the petitioner might cause harm to the local AITMC leader, Anubrata Mondal @ Keshto.
3. On the basis of the aforementioned complaint, Ausgram Police Station Case No. 298/2020 dated 22.09.2020 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 115/505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for investigation.
4. On 05.10.2020, a voice sample of the petitioner was recorded by the investigating agency before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Purba Bardhaman.
5. The petitioner states that the petitioner held a licence (being No. 124/81 of Ausgram Police Station) to use .12 Bore DBBL Gun No. 4046 manufactured by Khurmi Gun & Co. The petitioner also held a licence (being No. 426/81 of Ausgram Police Station) to use .32 Bore Revolver bearing No. C-0510 manufactured by Small Arms Co. The petitioner has been in lawful possession of the gun and the revolver under proper licence for about 40 years. The petitioner has been duly renewing the licenses from time to time and both the licences were valid till 31.12.2021.
6. A search and seizure at the house of the petitioner when he was in police custody led to seizure of a .32 Bore Revolver bearing No. C-0510 and .12 Bore DBBL Gun No. 4046. Two bullets of .12 Bore were also recovered. On the basis of the said reports, the officers prayed for revoking the arms licences of the petitioner, which the District Magistrate, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to allow vide order dated 28.09.2020 with a direction upon the petitioner to deposit the arms and the licences with the District Magistrate. However, the petitioner could not do so, because on 26.09.2020, during the course of the investigation of the instant case, the investigating agency had already seized both the arms and their licences from the house of the petitioner under a formal seizure list on 26.09.2020. On 01.10.2020 another raid was held at the house of the petitioner, however no seizure was made. Being aggrieved by the revocation of the arms licenses and the seizure of the arms and the licences by the investigating agency, the petitioner addressed a representation dated 12.10.2020 to the District Magistrate, Purba Bardhaman and the Superintendent of Police, Purba Bardhaman, requesting for cancelling the order of revocation. However, such representation has not been acted upon till date.
7. The petitioner states that in the meantime, vide an order dated 05.10.2020, the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in which the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was pleased to observe that there had been no further development in the investigation.
8. The petitioner states that he is a member of an All India Political Party, of which Anubrata Mondal @ Keshto is also a member. There have been differences of opinion amongst th
