Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Syed Rais Hussain vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 29 August, 2023
16
29.08.2023
Court No.237
sb.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
CRR 909 of 2016
With
IA No. CRAN 1 of 2016 (Old No. CRAN 3273 of 2016)
Syed Rais Hussain
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Aritra Bhattacharya
Mr. Samarjit Ghosal
... For the petitioner
Mr. Binay Panda
Ms. Pushpita Saha
... For the State
This revisional application assails the order dated 24th June,
2015, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Sealdah,
in connection with G.R. Case No. 1346 of 2011, corresponding to
Beniapukur Police Station Case No. 156 dated 26th May, 2011 under
Sections 147, 148, 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, whereby the
learned Magistrate refused to entertain the application under Section
173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed on behalf of the de
facto complainant with a prayer for further investigation.
Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has drawn my attention to the order passed by a coordinate
Bench of this Court in CRR 182 of 2014 on 26th March, 2014
directing the learned Magistrate to dispose of the application on merit
filed by the de facto complainant for further investigation before
taking up the trial of the criminal case.
On receipt of that order, the learned Magistrate passed the order
impugned on the plea of framing of charge, fixing for evidence and on
further ground of locus standi of the de facto complainant to file an
application for further investigation.
Therefore, the learned Magistrate did not comply the direction of
this Hon'ble Court by disposing the application on merits instead
refused the same on the plea of framing of charge in the case.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner had relied
on a judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Anant Thanur Karmuse vs. State of Maharashtra and Others,
reported in (2023) 5 SCC 802, wherein the it was observed as
follows:-
"38. In Dharam Pal, after taking into consideration the
catena of decisions on the point, it is observed and held that the
constitutional courts can direct for further investigation or
investigation by some other investigating agency. It is observed
that the purpose is, there has to be a fair investigation an a fair
trial. It is observed that the fair trial may be quite difficult unless
there is a fair investigation. It is further observed ad held that the
power to order fresh, de novo or reinvestigation being vested with
the constitutional courts, an absolute impediment for exercising
the said constitutional power which is meant to ensure a fair an
just invetigation".
Therefore, the pleas taken by the learned Magistrate were not at
all justified to refuse the application under Section 173(8) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure that too by violating the order passed by this
Hon'ble Court in CRR 182 of 2014.
Mr. Panda, learned advocate representing the State also harped
the same string of non-compliance of the direction of this Court.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, the order dated 24th June,
2015 passed in connection with G.R. Case No. 1346 of 2011 stands
set aside. The learned Judicial Magistrate is further directed to
dispose of the application filed on 5th June, 2012 under Section
173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on merits, before
proceeding further in this case, within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of this order.
With the aforesaid observations/directions the revisional
application and the connected application stand disposed of.
Department is directed to communicate a copy of this order to
the learned Magistrate, 3rd Court, Sealdah, for compliance.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent photostat certified
copy of this order to the parties, if applied for, after compliance with
all necessary formalities.
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
