Non-compliance with legal provisions can lead to the quashing of investigation and charge-sheet, while the sufficiency of material is crucial for upholding charges.

LAKSHMANA RAO, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER Manoj Kumar Giri has preferred this criminal revision against the order dated 25-3-2003 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special judge (SC/st), Hazaribagh in T. R. No. 90 of 2003 arising out of Sadar PS case No. 77 of 2002 (G. R. No. 476 of 2002), whereby and whereunder the prayer for discharge of the petitioner was rejected. Subsequently in course of pending disposal of this criminal revision, charges were framed against the petitioner under Sections 341, 323. 448, 354, IPC and also under Section 3 (l) (x)and 3 (1) (xi) of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on 1-5-2003 which was also challenged that the said order of framing charges be quashed.

( 2 ) INFORMANT Dr. Sandhya Topno alleged that on 22-2-2002 at about 10. 00 a. m. , petitioner Manoj Kumar Giri, who runs a medicine shop in the Sandwell Nursing Home where the informant is engaged, entered into her chamber, caught hold of her neck, pushed her with an intention to kill her. When the informant tried to rescue herself, this petitioner misbehaved with her and took away Rs. 3500/- from her bag. On the earlier occasions also, the petitioner had threatened the informant and had demanded money claiming himself to be the owner of the Nursing Home. On the day of alleged occurrence, petitioner wanted a false medical certificate from her, which was refused by her resulting the alleged occurrence.

( 3 ) ASSAILING the order rejecting to discharge this petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that S. I. of Police investigated the case, but the charge- sheet was submitted by Dy. S. P. among other Sections of the I. P. C. under Section 3 (1) (x) and 3 (l) (xi) of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and accordingly the cognizance was taken. It was submitted that when the Special Judge came to know that investigation was not done by a proper investigating officer of the rank of Dy. S. P. then by order dated 8-8-2002 he remitted back the case to the C. J. M. for re-investigation. Thereafter re-investigation was done by the same dy. S. P. who had supervised the earlier investigation done by the S. I. of police again submitted charge-sheet under Sections 341, 323, 448, 354, IPC and 3 (l) (x), 3 (l) (xi) of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

( 4 ) IT was submitted that investigation of the case was not done properly, Dy. S, P. had done the table work without any proper investigation. The Dy. S. P. was not competent person to investigate the case under rule 7 of the SC/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules. Under Rule 7 (2) the I. O. shall submit his report to the S. P. who will immediately forward the report to the Director general of Police of the State Government. In the present case, this procedure has not been followed. The Dy. S. P. who investigated the case on the order of the Court, was not notified in the official Gazette by the Government to investigate the case and as such investigation and charge-sheet is against the provision of law. Hence, no charge can be framed on the basis of such investigation.

( 5 ) LASTLY it was submitted that the informant has alleged regarding commission of theft and pressing of her neck with an intention to cause her murder hence prayed to add Sections 379 and 307, IPC also. But charge-sheet was not submitted under those sections which shows the falsehood of the allegation made by the informant against the petitioner.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the informant has submitted that, in a criminal procedure, there is no provision of amendment of the petition. It was submitted that the informant and the witnesses, who were examined in course of investigation, namely, Baijnath Prasad and Suchita bara, staffs of the Nursing Home, have supported the prosecution case to frame the charges against these petitioners under Sections 341, 323, 448, 354,379 and 307, IPC along with Sections 3 (l) (x) and 3 (l) (xi) of the sc/st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.