S.M. HUSSAIN Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition to quash the proceedings in Crl. M.P. No. 422/84 on the file of the XII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad as confirmed in Crl. R.P. No. 90 of 1984 by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The petitioner -accused is charge -sheeted for an offence under sections 304 -A and 338 I.P.C. in respect of an accident on 20 -4 -1982 at about 1 p.m. near Dilshuknagar in the course of which one person died and another injured. The complaint lodged by the Sub -Inspector of Police, Malakpet Police Station was investigated. Finally charge sheet was taken on file in C.C. 145 of 1983. During the course of the trial and after examination of one witness, the accused filed an application before the learned Magistrate to discharge him on the ground that the investigation in this case continued after the expiry of the time prescribed under section 167(5) of Criminal Procedure Code. The trial court negatived the plea. On revision, the Metropolitan Sessions Judge confirmed the order.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends that section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure prescribes 6 months time for completion of the investigation in a summons case and as the investigation in this case was not completed within six months from the date on which the offence was committed and the accused was arrested, the proceedings are vitiated. The learned Public Prosecutor contends that filing of the charge sheet is not a part of the investigation and as such the date of filing the charge sheet is not crucial for the purpose of determining the time prescribed under section 167(5) Cr.P.C. It is necessary to refer to relevant dates in the case. The accident occurred on 20 -4 -1982 and the accused was arrested on the same day. The charge sheet was prepared on 6 -10 -1983 and was filed in the court on 7 -10 -1983 Section 167 concerned with the procedure for investigation and the relevant provision is Section 167(5) which is as follows: -

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Ram Kumar v. State : 1981 Criminal Law Journal 1288 wherein an application was filed by the investigating officer to grant further time to complete the investigation beyond six months prescribed under section 167(5) Cr.P.C. The said application was, admittedly, filed after the expiry of six month's period. In the course of considering the objection that such an application is not maintainable after the expiry of the time prescribed under section 167(5) Cr.P.C. the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court held as follows: -