Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dulal Chandra Maitra vs Unknown on 14 September, 2011
Author: Kanchan Chakraborty
Bench: Kanchan Chakraborty
1 3. 14.09.2011
.
m.b. C.R.R. No. 3603 of 2010
With
C.R.A.N. 1919 of 2011
In Re.: An application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 In the matter of : Dulal Chandra Maitra..............petitioner. Mr. R.K. Ghosal, Md. Monire Alam..................................for the petitioner Mrs. Indrani Pal ..................................for the O.P. no. 2 Mr. Binoy Panda .................................for the State of W.B. Though the matter is appearing in the list under the heading "Extension of Interim Order", this Court proposes to dispose of the revisional application itself with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the parties.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by Dulal Chandra Maitra, an accused, praying for quashing of the proceeding, being G.R. No. 340 of 2010, arising out of Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No. 30 of 2010 dated 30.01.2010 under Sections 468/467/471/420 of the Indian Penal Code. The case is pending in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda. The petitioner has come up with this application praying for quashing of the proceeding as far as he is concerned on the ground that no case is made out, prima facie, 2 against him in the First Information Report as well as in the charge sheet.
A short reference to the factual aspect of the case is given below:
One Sis Mohammed lodged one First Information Report with the Harishchandrapur Police Station alleging therein that the petitioner, Dulal Chandra Maitra, working as Panchayet Karmee procured his appointment using false and fake certificate. He, in fact, studied in Daulatpur Junior High School but submitted Class-VIII pass certificate of Milangarh Sajjadia High Madrasah at the time of appointment without submitting his own school certificate of Daulatpur Junior High School. He used fake certificate to get the job showing his date of birth as 03.02.1965. In fact, his date of birth was 03.02.1959. On the basis of the said First Information Report, Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No. 30 of 2010 dated 30.01.2010 was registered, investigated into and ended in a charge sheet against the petitioner, Dulal Chandra Maitra, under Sections 468/467/471/420 of the Indian Penal Code showing a strong prima facie case against him. The petitioner has come up with this application for quashing of the same on the grounds stated above.
Mr. Ghosal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, draws attention of this Court to the Annexures P-1, P-2, 3 P-3 and P- 4 to the petition and submits that the certificate issued by the Headmaster of the Daulatpur Junior High School, the Transfer Certificate as well as the Certificate issued by Milangarh Sajjadia High Madrasah altogether indicates that the date of birth of the petitioner is 03.02.1965. However, Annexure P-4 shows a different picture. Under Serial No. 29, the name of Dulal Chandra Maitra is recorded as one of the students of the school wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 03.02.1959. It is a copy of Admission Register of the school. The contents of the Annexure P-4 and that of Annexures P-1 and P-2 are quite different and, undoubtedly, required proper investigation. In course of investigation, the investigating officer of the particular police station came to a conclusion that the certificates so used by the petitioner were fake. He found strong prima facie case against him under the aforementioned sections.
Smt. Pal, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Panda, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party/State of West Bengal, together contend that there are sufficient materials, prima facie, suggesting using of fake documents by the petitioner at the time of procuring the job and that being the case, this Court should not exercise its extraordinary power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and quash the proceeding.4
On careful perusal of the documents, petition of complaint, First Information Report as well as the charge sheet filed, it appears clearly that allegations and aspersions put forth therein, if are accepted on their face value uncontroverted and its entirety, obviously constitute, prima facie, the offences alleged. Whether the documents made Annexures to the petition are authentic or not is a question of fact and subject to strict proof. That can only be done in course of trial.
Considering the facts above, I find that this case does not appear to be fit and proper where this Court should exercise its extraordinary power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and quash the proceeding. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner is rejected.
With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of.
In the facts of the case, there will, however, be no order as to costs.
Interim order, if there be any, stands vacated. In view of disposal of the revisional application, the application for extension of interim order of stay, being C.R.A.N. 1919 of 2011, has become infructuous and the same is disposed of accordingly.5
Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.
(Kanchan Chakraborty, J.)