O R D E R

DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :- 12/03/2024

1. The instant misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1912/17, pending trial before learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.26, Jaipur Metropolitan City (Sanganer), arising out of FIR No.47/17 PS Sanganer Sadar, Jaipur (South) for offences under Sections 341, 323 and 506 IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently and fervently contends that the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR is vitiated as investigation of the present case has been conducted by a Head Constable, who was not empowered to conduct the investigation of the case involving cognizable offence(s). He further submits that not only investigation was conducted by a Head Constable but charge-sheet was also filed by him, which is apparent from the charge sheet filed before the learned court below. He has placed reliance on the following judgments:-

(i) Pankaj Bansal & Anr vs State of Rajasthan reported in 2018 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1 ;

(ii) Pharisa Promin & Ors. vs State of Rajasthan reported in 2019 (4) Cr.L.R. (Raj. 1797

3. Learned counsel also draws attention of the Court to the information received under RTI Act from the office of Addl. Director General of Police, Crime Branch, Rajasthan as per which, only the police officers of and above the rank of ASI are empowered to conduct investigation. The aforesaid information received under RTI Act by the petitioner, is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference:-

dk;kZy; vfr- egkfuns'kd iqfyl] vijk/k 'kk[kk]

jktLFkku Øekad%&o&15 ¼65½ m-e-fu-@lh-ch-@lw-v-@2019@752 fnukad%&01-03-2016 Jh Hkjr dqekj 'kekZ]

fuoklh & e-u- ch&206] ¶ySV ua- 505]

jktsUnz ekxZ] ckiw uxj] t;iqjA fo"k;%& lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds rgr pkgh xbZ lwpuk ds lEcU/k esaA egksn;]

mijksDr fo"k;kUrxZr vki }kjk izsf"kr vkosnu i= fnukad 14-02-2019 dks bl dk;kZy; esa izkIr gqvkA izkIr vkosnu i= esa vuqla/kku ds lEcU/k esa pkgh xbZ lwpuk ds lEcU/k esa ys[k gS fd jktLFkku iqfyl fu;e 1965 ds fu;e 6-1¼2½ }kjk lgk;d mi fujh{kd rd ds iqfyl vf/kdkfj;ksa dks gh vfHk;ksxksa ds vuqla/kku ds fy, vf/kd`r fd;k x;k gSA ;fn vki mDr lwpuk ls larq"V ugha gSa] rks vfrfjDr egkfuns'kd iqfyl]

vijk/k ,oa izFke vihy vf/kdkjh] iqfyl eq[;ky;] yky dksBh] jktLFkku] t;iqj dks i=

izkfIr ds 30 fnol eas izFke vihy izLrqr dj ldrs gSaA ln~Hkkoh izfr layXu ¼fodkl dqekj½ mi egkfujh{kd iqfyl jkT; yksd lwpuk vf/kdkjh lh-vkbZ-Mh¼lh-ch-½jktLFkku] t;iqjA

4. On these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner craves acceptance of the instant misc. petition and quashing of the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant oppose the submissions of the petitioner's counsel. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the issue/argument raised by counsel for the petitioner has already been discussed and considered in the case of State of Rajasthan vs Kera & Ors. reported in 1998 3 RLW (Raj.) 1577 wherein it was held that Head Constable is well within his power to conduct investigation of a case involving cognizable offence(s).

6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and perused the material available on record. I have also gone through the judgments cited by both the sides.

7. The question arises for consideration of this Court is whether a Head Constable can conduct investigation of a case involving cognizable offence or not.

8. Section 157 of Cr.P.C prescribes procedure for investigation. The same is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready-

reference:-

"Section 157 Procedure for investigation.

(1) If, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a police station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered under section 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of