The wide powers available under Section 482 of the Code should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

This criminal petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, (1973) (‘the Code’ and/or ‘the CrPC’, for short) is directed against the criminal proceeding in Sessions Case no. 126(N)/2015, presently pending before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon, Assam.

2. In order to appreciate the nature of challenge, it deems proper to narrate the relevant background facts which have emerged from the records of Sessions Case no. 126(N)/2015 and this criminal petition.

2.1. The respondent no. 2 (hereinafter also referred to as ‘the informant’, at places, for easy reference) had lodged a First Information Report (FIR) on 02.09.2014 before the Officer In-Charge, Nagaon Sadar Police Station against 3 (three) persons as accused. The petitioner no. 1 was named as accused no. 1 whereas the petitioner no. 2 and the petitioner no. 3 were named as accused no. 2 and accused no. 3 respectively. The accused no. 2 and accused no. 3 are the father and the mother respectively of the accused no. 1.

2.2. In the FIR so lodged, the informant had, inter-alia, alleged that the accused no. 2 and the accused no. 3 offered a proposal of marriage for their son i.e. the accused no. 1, who was aged about 17 years at that time, with his daughter, who was aged about 15 (fifteen) years at that time. The daughter of the informant (hereinafter also referred to as ‘the victim’, at places, for convenience) has been impleaded as the respondent no. 3 in this criminal petition. The informant refused the proposal given by the accused nos. 2 and 3. It was alleged that at about 09-00 a.m. on 02.09.2014, the accused no. 1 had taken away the victim while she was on her way to her school. It was further alleged that the accused no. 2 and the accused no. 3 were also involved in the said act of kidnapping. It was requested by the informant to recover his victim daughter.

2.3. On receipt of the said FIR, the same was registered as Nagaon Police Station Case no. 1447/2014 (Corresponding G.R. Case no. 3290/2014) under Sections 366A/34, Indian Penal Code and the case was entrusted to a Sub-Inspector of Police for investigation. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O.) filed a charge sheet under 173, CrPC being Charge Sheet no. 761/2014 dated 26.11.2014 finding a prima facie case against the accused no. 1 to proceed for trial for the offence under Section 366A, IPC. The accused no. 2 and the accused no. 3 were not charge sheeted. On submission of the charge sheet, the committal court by order dated 26.06.2015 committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Nagaon finding the offence under Section 366A, IPC a sessions triable one. On receipt of the case record of G.R. Case no. 3290/2014 the same was registered as Sessions Case No. 126(N)/2015. The learned Sessions Judge after securing the appearance of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel and upon perusal of the record of the case, had framed a charge under Section 366, IPC against the accused on 28.05.2015. The charge was explained and read over to the accused and the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the trial of the case proceeded.

3. It is seen from the charge sheet that the Investigating Authority had cited 7 (seven) nos. of witnesses as prosecution witness to establish the case of the prosecution. Included amongst them were the Investigating Officer and the Doctor. On 30.06.2015, 2 (two) prosecution witnesses were examined by the prosecution and there were also cross-examined by the defence on that day. Thereafter, two prosecution witnesses – P.W.1 and P.W.2 -were discharged. On 08.09.2015, P.W.3 was examined, cross-examined and discharged. On 07.06.2016, P.W.4, the doctor, was examined and cross-examined and P.W.5 was examined and cross-examined on 09.08.2016. It transpires that two of the witnesses from amongst the listed witnesses remained to be examined and it was upto the prosecution to examine them or not