Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Mst. Khodeja Bibi vs The State Of West Bengal on 18 March, 2014
Author: R. K. Bag
Bench: R. K. Bag
1
2.
18.03.2014
F.B. CRR No. 1638 of 2013 Mst. Khodeja Bibi Vs. The State of West Bengal In the matter of : An application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Mr. Swapan Kumar Mallick Mr. Goutam Roy ..... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Amartya Ghosh ..... For the State.
By filing this revisional application the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22nd January, 2013 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basirhat, North 24- Parganas in G.R. No. 1404 of 2010 arising out of Minakhan Police Station Case No. 159 of 2010 dated 27th July, 2010 under Sections 188/427/430/431 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that learned Magistrate failed to exercise his jurisdiction by not giving direction to the officer-in-charge of Minakhan Police Station to complete the investigation of Minakhan Police Station Case No. 159 of 2010 dated 27th July, 2010.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the instant criminal case was started on the basis of direction given 2 by the Hon'ble High Court on 15th December, 2009 in W.P. No. 18544 (W) of 2009. According to learned advocate for the petitioner, the investigating agency has not completed the investigation even after lapse of almost 3 ½ years of registration of the FIR on the basis of direction of the Hon'ble High Court.
Learned advocate for the State submits that it is bounden duty of the investigating agency to complete the investigation as early as possible and the investigation cannot be kept pending for indefinite period.
Having heard the learned advocates representing the respective parties and on consideration of the impugned order passed by learned Magistrate, I find that learned Magistrate has failed to exercise his jurisdiction on the ground that the present petitioner is not the de facto complainant or informant of Minakhan Police Station Case No. 159 of 2010 dated 27th July, 2010. The background of registration of the FIR by one sub- inspector of police is the direction given by the Hon'ble High Court in the writ petition and the said writ petition was filed by the instant petitioner. Naturally, the petitioner can very well agitate before the appropriate forum if the investigation is not completed within a reasonable time. On consideration of the background of registration of FIR of the instant case and on further consideration of the fact that the investigation has not been completed even after lapse of more than 3 ½ years, learned Magistrate is not justified in refusing to give direction to the officer-in-charge of the Minakhan Police Station to complete the investigation within a reasonable period of time.
3In view of my above findings, the impugned order dated 22nd January, 2013 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basirhat, North 24-Parganas in G.R. No. 1404 of 2010 arising out of Minakhan Police Station Case No. 159 of 2010 dated 27th July, 2010 under Sections 188/427/430/431 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 77 of the Embankment Act is set aside.
The officer-in-charge of Minakhan Police Station is directed to complete the investigation of Minakhan Police Station Case No. 159 of 2010 dated 27th July, 2010 by engaging suitable investigating officer within a reasonable time and preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order.
Let copy of the order be sent down to the learned Court below for favour of information.
Let photostat copies of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the learned Advocate appearing for the State on usual undertaking.
Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent Photostat certified copy of this order to the petitioner, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
The criminal revision is, thus, disposed of.
( R. K. Bag, J. ) 4