Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Sg) In Re : Indranil Mukherjee vs State Of Gujarat And Others Reported In ... on 31 January, 2017
Author: Asha Arora
Bench: Asha Arora
31.1.2017 C.R.R. No. 3862 of 2016(Assigned) (44) (sg) In re : Indranil Mukherjee ... Petitioner Re : An application under Section 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Mr. Ayan Bhattacharjee, Mr. Rohit Jalan .. for the petitioner Mr. Anand Keshari .. for the opposite party no.1/State Mr. Udaysankar Bhattacharya, Mr. Anupam Bhattacharya, Mr. Naresh Prasad Gupta .. for the opposite party no.2 Mr. Kallol Kumar Basu, Mr. Rahul Haldar .. for the opposite party no.3 Affidavit of service be kept on record.
An order dated November 7, 2016 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar, North 24-Parganas in G.R. Case No. 463 of 2016 arising out of Bidhannagar (East) Police Station Case No. 48 dated June 3, 2016 under Sections 341/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been assailed.
The backdrop of the matter is that after conclusion of investigation of the above mentioned case, the Charge-sheet was filed against one of the accused namely, Rabindranath Bhattacharjee, the opposite party no.2 herein. The Investigating Officer prayed for discharge of the co-accused Ramkrisna Ghosh, the opposite party no.3 herein, for want of sufficient evidence. After receiving the report of investigation in final form the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate passed the following order on August 5, 2016 :
" Received C/s no. 49/16 dt. 29.07.16
u/s. 341/325/506 IPC.
Against accd. Rabindranath Bhattacharjee. Perused the documents as forwarded by the police u/s. 173 Cr.P.C.
Cognizance is taken. Accd Rabindranath Bhattacharjee is on Court bail. Another accd. Ramkrishna Ghosh is not sent up in C/S. Issue notice upon the D/Complainant.
To 05.10.16 for S/R."
The petitioner/defacto complainant, intending to file a protest petition made an application before the learned Magistrate seeking copies of the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., injury report, seizure lists and other materials collected during investigation. By the impugned order, the aforesaid petition was rejected. Placing reliance upon the case of Jakia Nasim Ahesan and another Versus State of Gujarat and others reported in (2011) 12 Supreme Court Cases 302, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that before taking a decision on a "closure" report, the court should make available to the complainant copies of statements of witnesses and other related documents to provide him an opportunity of being heard regarding the matter.
Mr. Udaysankar Bhattacharya and Mr. Kallol Kumar Basu appearing for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 countered that there is no provision in the Criminal Procedure Code for supply of copies of statements of witnesses and other related documents to the defacto complainant who can apply for certified copies of the said documents if required. In the context of the matter it is pertinent to refer to the relevant paragraph 11 of the judgment reported in (2011) 12 Supreme Court Cases 302 (supra), which is quoted hereunder :
"11. However, at this juncture, we deem it necessary to emphasise that if for any stated reason SIT opines in its report, to be submitted in terms of this order, that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds for proceeding against any person named in the complaint dated 8-6-2006, befor taking a final decision on such "closure" report, the court shall issue notice to the complainant and make available to her copies of the statements of the witnesses, other related documents and the investigation report strictly in accordance with law as enunciated by this Court in Bhagwant Singh v. Commr. Of Police. For the sake of ready reference, we may note that in the said decision, it has been held that in a case where the Magistrate to whom a report is forwarded under Section 173(2)( i ) of the Code, decides not to take cognizance of the offence and to drop the proceedings or takes a view that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against some of the persons mentioned in the FIR, the Magistrate must give notice to the informant and provide him an opportunity to be heard at the time of consideration of the report."
Having considered the submissions on behalf of the parties with reference to the decision referred, I am of the view that it would be in the interest of justice to make available to the petitioner/defacto complainant copies of the statements of the witnesses, injury report, seizure list and other related documents to afford to him an opportunity of being heard regarding the aforesaid report submitted by the Investigating Officer. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar shall arrange for furnishing to the petitioner/defacto complainant copies of statements of witnesses and other related documents at the cost of the petitioner/defacto complainant within one month from the date of communication of this order.
With the aforesaid direction, the application being C.R.R. 3862 of 2016 is disposed of.
A copy of this order shall be communicated forthwith to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar, North 24-Parganas. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the applicant upon compliance of requisite formalities.
( Asha Arora, J. )