Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.
Bikash Bej and Ors – Appellants
Versus
The Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. – Respondents
C.R.R 1474 of 2024 With C.R.R 1510 of 2024
Decided on : 22-04-2024.
Criminal Conspiracy - Quashing of Notices - Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 302/34 IPC - WPA No 16932 of 2021 - Marishda PS Case No. 71 of 2021 - RC0562021S0052 - Sections 120B, 302, 364, 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Sections 160, 161, 163 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - N. M. T. Joy Immaculate & Ors. (2004) 5 SCC 729; Ram Chandra Panda and Anr. (2023 SCC OnLine Cal 55); Sutapa Adhikari & Ors. (CRR 2464 of 2022) - Nandini Satpathy –vs- P. L. Dani (1978) 2 SCC 424; Dipakbhai Jagdish Chandra Patel –Vs- State of Gujarat (2019) 16 SCC 547; Ram Nath –vs- State of U.P (2024) 3 SCC 502
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the quashing of notices issued under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Central Bureau of Investigation in connection with a criminal conspiracy case related to post-poll violence.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the revisional applications, stating that the petitioners' grievance regarding the issuance of notices under Section 160 of the CrPC could not be addressed as the investigating agency was empowered to issue notices to persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the legality of the notices issued under Section 160 of the CrPC and the potential arrest of the petitioners during the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various judgments to establish that the term 'any person' in Section 160 of the CrPC includes persons acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, which empowers the investigating agency to issue notices for their presence during the investigation.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the revisional applications, upholding the legality of the notices issued under Section 160 of the CrPC by the investigating agency.
JUDGMENT :
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
1. The revisional applications being CRR 1474 of 2024 and CRR 1510 of 2024 involve common question of facts and law and arise out of the same case, as such both of them are decided and disposed of by a single order.
2. The revisional applications have been preferred for quashing of the notices dated 03-04-2024 issued under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Central Bureau of Investigation, SCB, Kolkata in connection with RC0562021S0052 dated 21-12-2021 under Sections 302/34 IPC.
3. The background of the case refers to the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta in WPA No 16932 of 2021 which is related to post poll violence and wherein Marishda PS Case No. 71 of 2021 dated 30-03-2021 was transferred to the CBI pursuant to the order dated 31.01.2023.
4. Accordingly, the case was re-numbered as above and the investigation of the case commenced at the instance of the CBI, SCB, Calcutta.
5. At the time of hearing of the revisional application, the Central Bureau of Investigation has submitted a report and a copy of the chargesheet has also been filed. The brief facts of the case as set out in the chargesheet are as follows :-
“The instant case was registered by CBI, SCB, Kolkata on 21.12.2021 u/s 302 & 34 of IPC, in compliance to the order dated 19.08.2021 of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta at Kolkata in WPAs (A) 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149 & 167 of 2021 by re-registering Marishda PS FIR No. 71/2021 dated 30.03.2021.
The Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in its order dated 31.01.2023 in WPA No. 16932 of 2021 (Ratan Dalai versus State of Bengal & Ors.) issued directions which are as follows:- "In terms of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court, inter alia, in WPA (P) No. 142 of 2021 dated 19.08.2021, let the FIR (Case Number 71 of 2021 of Marishda Police Station) shall stand transferred for further investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation."
FIR Number 71/2021 of PS Marishda, Distt. Purba Medinipur was registered on the basis of complaint dated 30.03.2021 lodged by Sh. Kalipada Shit s/o Late Basanta Kumar Shit r/o, Village + PO + PS -Marishda, Dist.-Purba Medinipur, West Bengal.
It was alleged in the FIR that on 30.03.2021 (at about 10.00 AM), the accused persons, namely, (1) Shankar Samanta, (2) Sk. Jamir, (3) Tapas Bej, (4) Bibhas Bej, (5) Lalu Ari, (6) Sourav Bera, (7) Pradip Mondal @ Batul, (8) Debabrata Panda, (9) Bikash Bej, (10) Ashok Jena and (11) Ratan Jena under the shelter of TMC picked up Janmenjoy Dalai @ Chandu, an active worker of CPI(M) in the north Kanthi Assembly, forcefully on motor cycle near Masagaon Bridge in a planned manner and took him to Kandua Village at Bhaja Chowly Area. There he was badly beaten by the said miscreants with lathi, iron rods, sharp weapons and caused wounds all over his body and threw him dead in an empty place.
After investigation, the State police filed charge sheet on 30.06.2021 against 06 accused persons, including 4 FIR named accused persons; viz., (i) Shankar Samanta, (ii) S.K. Jamir, (iii) Lalu Ari & (iv) Sourav Bera and 2 more persons; viz. (i) Tapas Mondal & (ii) Mithun Kala.
The investigation by CBI has revealed that Shri Janmenjoy Dalai was earlier working for CPM & subsequently shifted to TMC. During the 2021 West Bengal Assembly elections, he shifted his allegiance to BJP & campaigning for BJP. The Assembly elections were held on 27.03.2021. On the date of election itself, i.e., on 27.03.2021, Shri
Nand Dulal Maity (a Distt. level President of TMC) was assaulted by some persons, including victim Late Janmenjoy Dalai. In this regard, a FIR no. 155/ 2021 was registered on 28.03.2021 u/s 341, 323, 325, 307, 427, 506 & section 34 IPC on the complaint of Shri Budhdeb Maity (A-11) son of Shri Nand Dulal Maity. It is alleged that when his father was retuning in vehicle no. WB-32 1340 with Shri Prabir Mishra, a candidate of Uttar Kanthi, the miscreants attacked his father with wooden sticks, iron rods & beat hi
AI
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.
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 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....
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 evidence for summoning an accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C should be based on the allegations in the FIR and the deposition during trial, rather than on the statement made under Section 161 Cr.P.....
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....
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
