PANCHANAN MONDAL Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule is at the instance of the accused petitioner against an order dated the 21st April 1969, passed by Sri A. K. Roy. Sub.Divisional Magistrate, Tamluk in C. R. Case No. 728 of 1968 rejecting the prayer of the accused -petitioner to grant a certified copy of the first information report in the case to him.

(2.) A point of law of some importance arises in the Rule and the background of facts leading on to the same may be put in a short compass. The accused Panchanan Mondal was arrested in connection' with Panskura P. S. Case No'28 of 396m under Sa 302/201, Penal Code and produced before the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Tamluk on 22.10 -1968. The forwarding report by the police stated that the accused was suspected in the P. I R. by the complainant and his complicity transpired during the investigation He was directed to be in jail custody till the 6th November, 1968. On a prayer for bail made on his behalf on 6 11 -1968, the C. 8 I. opposed the same and the prayer was rejected at that stage Tagid was issued for the report from the I. O and the memo of evidence was called for. On 20 11.1968, the memo of evidence, which was not submitted was again called for and the application for bail was rejected. The next date fixed was on 4 12 1968, when again the prayer for bail was rejected by the learned Magistrate on going through the memo of evidence. On the 18th December 1968, again the prayer for bail was refused on the ground that the allegations were serious and there was a chance of abacondence. A tagid was issued for the report by the I. O. fixing 2 1.1969 as the next date. The prayers for bail made on behalf of the accused were thereafter rejected on 2.1.1969, U.I. 1969, 8.3 -1969, 15.3.1969 and 31.3 -1969. A tagid was also issued for the report from the I. O. on the last date, On 21 -4 -1969 a prayer was made on behalf of the defence for granting a oopy of the first information report and the same was opposed by the C. S. I. The learned Sub Divisional Magistrate ultimately rejected the said prayer on the ground that the charge sheet was not yet submitted and that the right to obtain a copy of the P. I. R. before the charge sheet is filed, has been taken away by implications under the provisions of Section 173 (4), Criminal P.C. The said order has been impugned and the present Rule was issued.

(3.) THE first contention of Mr. Dutt has got much force behind it. The F. I. R. is not barred Under Section 162 of the Criminal P, C. as it is not the result of any investigation and does not consist of materials collected during the same, To be preoise, the F. I. R. is indeed the starting point of an investigation and not the result thereof and bo is not barred Under Section 162 of the Criminal P.C.