Patna High Court - Orders
Manish Kumar @ Amit Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 11 December, 2024
Author: Rajiv Roy
Bench: Rajiv Roy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84216 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2024 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================
Manish Kumar @ Amit Kumar S/o Sri Sunil Kumar Resident of Village-
Kharauna, P.S.- Bhagwanganj, District- Patna. Presently Residing at Vill -
Makhdumpur, Utta, PS. - Jehanabad, Distt.- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Sah, Advocate
Mr. Udbhav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 11-12-2024Heard Mr. Udbhav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 403 of 2024 for the offence punishable under sections 127(2) and 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita lodged on 07.09.2024 by the informant, Satyendra Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he is the owner and driver of the Truck bearing BR-02-GA- 5826 which was loaded with the goods of Hindustan Unilever Company moving from Hajipur to Lakhisarai. On 06.09.2024, when it reached near Prasi Petrol Pump in the district of Nalanda, a Swift Dzire overtook and claiming themselves to be the officers of Excise Department. Firstly, they wanted the informant to show the challan for the loaded goods and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 2/8 thereafter, suddenly, he was forcefully pushed inside the car and taken to Bhagan Bigha, Mora Talab, Debi Sarai to Ekangarsarai and after moving towards Jehanabad, he was tied with a tree on the roadside while they escaped with the truck.
4. Thereafter, the informant untied himself and started moving in one direction. Upon sight of the patrolling Police vehicle of Kokri Police Station within the district of Jehanabad, he narrated his ordeal to them. The Police officials of Kokri P.S. thereafter directed him to approach the Noorsarai Police Station where the alleged occurrence has taken place. Later, he took the Bus to Biharsharif and telephonically reported the matter to the transport company from where the goods were loaded and on their advice, lodged the FIR at the Noorsarai P.S. Nalanda.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subsequent recovery of the goods of Hindustan Unilever Company from the house actually belongs to his younger brother which was leased out to one Manoj Kumar (Annexure-2 to the petition) and as such, he has falsely been made an accused in the case leading to his arrest.
6. Learned APP representing the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that recovery/seizure has been made from the house of the younger brother of the petitioner and as Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 3/8 such, he cannot exonerate himself from the alleged recovery.
7. Having heard the parties, the most disturbing aspect that this Court finds is the attitude of the Kokri Police Station's Police Personnel who were present on the patrolling duty on 06.09.2024. They are/were assigned the role of patrolling duty only to ensure the safety and protection of the people moving on the road/area. However, it is surprising that a truck is looted, the victim is tied to a tree, anyhow frees himself and thereafter approaches them.
8. Instead of taking immediate action/steps by alerting all the Police Stations as also the Noorsarai P.S. about the alleged robbery, advised him to go back to the Police Station concerned under whose jurisdiction, the Truck was looted. Clearly, crucial hours were lost in the process. The Police was under the bounden duty to immediately lodge Zero FIR and transfer it to the Noorsarai Police Station after recording the statement of the informant. Clearly, they faulted on both counts.
9. It is to be noted that the Bureau of Police Research & Development and Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi emphasized about Section 173 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (henceforth for short 'the BNSS) and it outlined the Zero FIR registration which read as follows:-
1. Lodging a Zero FIR under BNSS Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 4/8 Step 1: A complainant approaches any police station irrespective of territorial jurisdiction (173(1) BNSS) to complain.
Step 2: On the receipt of any information regarding the commission of cognizable offence which has been committed outside of the territorial jurisdiction of that police station, the SHO or the officer on duty records the details of the complaint in the Zero FIR register, irrespective of the jurisdiction shall register the case as Zero FIR or 'O' FIR under relevant sections of law.
As per provisions of 173(1) of BNSS
"1. Every information relating to the
commission of a cognizable offence,
irrespective of the area where the offence is committed may be given orally or by electronic communication and if given to an officer in charge of a police station-
(i) orally, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 5/8 writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it;
(ii) by electronic communication, it shall be taken on record by him on being signed within three days by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf:
The information given by women against whom an offence under section 64-71, section 74-79 or section 124 of the BNS, 2023 is alleged to have been committed or attempted, the same shall be recorded by a woman police officer or any women officer. Provided further that-
In the event that the person against whom an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68, section 69, section 70, section 71, section 74, section 75, section 76, section 77, section 78, section 79 or section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is alleged to have been committed or Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 6/8 attempted, is temporarily or permanently mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient place of such person's choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be;
(b) the recording of such information shall be video graphed;
(c) the police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Judicial Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (6) of section 183 as soon as possible."
10. Nothing sort of that happened and instead, the informant was directed to go to the Police Station under whose jurisdiction the occurrence took place for lodging of the F.I.R. As per the FIR itself, he was left near Kokri Bazar at 04:00 AM, took a bus and reached Biharsharif at 06:00 AM and upon instruction of transport company (from where the goods were loaded), came to the Noorsarai P.S. to lodge the FIR. The Kokri Police Station Officials are duty bound to answer to the said lapses on their part.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 7/8
11. The Station Head Officer of the Kokri Police Station, Jehanabad as also all the Police Officials on the patrolling duty on the night of 06.09.2024, (from the record their names and designations can be ascertained) who were approached by the informant shall be present in the Court on 27.01.2025 at 2:15 P.M. to answer to the following questions:
"(i) why immediate action was not taken on the information given by the informant regarding loot of the loaded Truck;
(ii) why the zero FIR was not lodged and thereafter transferred to the Noorsarai P.S;
(iii) why all the Police Stations were not alerted about the looted Truck flashing the description of the Truck with Registration number;
(iv) why he was directed to go to the Police Station of occurrence to lodge the FIR."
12. The Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad shall be filing counter-affidavit through Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP on the steps he has taken after knowledge of the present case.
13. A copy of the petition is to be given to Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP for the State by the learned counsel for the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84216 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 8/8 petitioner and receipt be filed in the office by tomorrow.
14. In the meantime, call for the case diary and criminal antecedent report of the petitioner in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 403 of 2024 from the Court concerned.
15. List this case on 27.01.2025 at 2:15 PM as a 'Tied up Matter'.
16. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad for his perusal and filing of counter-affidavit. He shall also ensure the presence of the then S.H.O., Kokri Police Station as also the Police Officials on patrolling duty, whether they are posted in Jehanabad under his jurisdiction and/or anywhere in the State of Bihar.
17. The name of Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP be printed in the cause-list.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/-
U T