M. KRISHNARAJ Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the 'B' Party to quash the proceedings in C.C.8954 of 1987 on the file of the seventh Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras.

(2.) THE 1st petitioner herein viz., M. Krishnaraj lodged an information before B -1 -North Beach Police Station, Madras, in respect of an occurrence which took place on 23.9.1987 around 11.30 A.M. in front of Anchor Gate Building, Rajaji Salai, Madras -1 which was registered in Crime No. 787 of 1987 for offences under Ss. 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code against one E. Devadoss and three others. In respect of the same occurrence, the aforesaid E. Devadoss lodged an information before N -1 -Royapuram Police Station against the petitioners herein, which was registered in Crime No. 737 of 1987 for an offence under S. 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Since the place of occurrence was within the jurisdiction of B -1 -North Beach Police Station, the F.I.R. registered in Crime No. 737 of 1987 by N -1 -Royapuram Police Station was transferred to B -1 -North Beach Police Station which in turn registered the transferred F.I.R. in Crime No. 788 of 1987. The Sub Inspector of Police, B -1 -North Beach Police Station, instead of completing the formalities of investigation in respect of both the crime numbers and filing a report either positive or negative under S. 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, adopted a short circuit method of charging both the parties for an innocuous offence of affray under S. 160 of the Indian Penal Code arraying the petitioners herein as 'B' party and the other party as 'A' party in the court below, giving arise to the present petition by the 'B' Party.

(3.) FROM a bare perusal of the above rule it is crystal clear that in a complaint and counter complaint arising out of the same transaction, a mandate is cast upon the investigating officer to enquire into both of them and adopt one or the other of the two courses viz., (1) to charge the case where the accused were the aggressors or (2) to refer both the cases if he finds untrue. If the investigating Officer finds that either of the courses is difficult, he should seek the opinion of the Public Prosecutor and act accordingly. A final report should be sent in respect of the cases as mistake of law and the complainant or the counter -complaint, as the case may be should be advised about the disposal by a notice in Form 96 and to seek remedy before the specified Magistrate if he is aggrieved by the disposal of the case by the police.