A magistrate's acceptance of a final report is valid if based on a proper assessment of the evidence. Investigating officers maintain the discretion to prioritize relevant evidence. Civil court judgments regarding documents are not automatically binding on criminal proceedings, as criminal guilt requires an independent, evidentiary-based determination.

ORDER :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. P.D. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. for the respondents.

2. The legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 17.02.18, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.J.M.), Jorhat in Jorhat P.S. Case No. 630/2016, under Sections 120(B)/171(C)/197/469/499/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), are challenged in this petition under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Further, it is also prayed for directing the Jorhat police to conduct further investigation of the case in terms of the provisions of Section 173(8)of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

3. The background facts leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under:-

“The petitioner is a social worker and he is connected with various social activities. He was a Member of the Assam Legislative Assembly from Jorhat Legislative Assembly Constituency for the period from 2006-2011 and 2011-2016. He has acquired status and dignity in the society and he has been maintaining an impeccable character. On 01.04.16, the petitioner lodged an FIR (ANNEXURE-1) before the Jorhat Police Station, stating inter alia that amongst others that 4 accused persons, by forging the educational qualification Certificates and Mark Sheet of the petitioner, issued by the Dibrugarh University, have hatched a political conspiracy and trying to provide a political mileage to a particular political party in the eve of the Assembly Elections, by circulating the aforesaid forged documents amongst the people. And it was done to undermine the image of the petitioner. They had shown the fabricated certificates to the people and to the Press stating that the petitioner did not pass B.Com. Examination held in the year 1981. The accused persons had also arranged a meeting at the Press Club, Jorhat on that day with an attempt to get the matter widely circulated on the eve of casting of vote on 04.01.16, with an intention to damage the image of the petitioner and help the political party whom they support. Accordingly, the petitioner has requested the Police to search and seize all the forged documents already circulated and in the custody of the accused persons and to punish them as per the provisions of law. The petitioner has also enclosed all the relevant educational qualification documents along with the FIR.

Upon the said FIR, the Officer-in-Charge of Jorhat Police Station had registered a case, being Jorhat P.S. No. 630/16, under Sections 120 (B)/171 (C)/197/469/499/34 of the Indian Penal Code and investigated the same. However, on completion of investigation, police submitted a Final Report, under Section 173 of Cr. P C, being Final Report No. 1527/2017, dated 16.11.2017, (ANNEXURE-2). And along with the Final Report, the Investigating Officer had filed a Non-F.I.R. Case, No. 18/17 (Part-III), stating that during the investigation of Jorhat P.S. Case No. 630/2016, the police after verification of the record of the Dibrugarh University relating to informant/petitioner, it was found that the informant/petitioner did not pass the B.Com. Examination, and the Mark Sheet enclosed is a false document. Thereafter, the Final Report was submitted before the Court of the learned CJM, Jorhat.

Thereafter, the learned C.J.M., Jorhat, has issued a notice to the petitioner directing him to file objection, if any, as regard acceptance of the Final Report. On receipt of the aforesaid notice, th