ARCHANA SEAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is directed against the s dated 20th Nov., 2000, 22nd Dec., 2000, 7th Feb., 2001 and 27th Feb., 2001, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore in Case No. T. R. 263 of 2000, thereby refusing the prayer of the petitioner for issuance of search warrant under Sec. 91, Crimial P.C. for obtaining certain documents. The learned lawyer for the petitioner submits that the entire procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate was completely wrong. Although search warrant for recovery of the child was issued by the learned Magistrate but the same in respect of the documents which have been prayed for was refused by the learned Magistrate by his order dated 7th February. 2001. which was not in accordance with law. He has further submitted that in view of the fact that the case involved sessions triable offence, the learned Magistrate should have forthwith remitted the case and was not bound by the report submitted by the police in this regard.

(2.) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor with Mr. K. L. Mukherjee, appearing for the State has opposed the submissions of Mr. Ray, learned lawyer appearing for the petitioner. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the learned Magistrate has rightly refused the prayer for search warrant for producing such documents and there was also legality in issuance of search warrant for recovery of the child but as the same has already been executed, he does not want to remit the same but with regard to documents the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that it was the correct order and the learned Magistrate has not yet proceeded in any direction as contemplated under the law and the prayer was rightly not acceded to.

(3.) Having heard the submissions of Mr. Ray appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, I find that there is a basic aspect of the matter which requires some discussion. It appears from the petition filed under Sec. 156(3), Crimial P.C. by the petitioner, offence under Sections 306, 348 and 34 of the I.PC. was stated against the accused person. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by her order No. 1 dated 8th Nov., 2000 acted on the basis of the said petition and directed perused the petition filed by one Smt. Archana Paul. Heard. The prayer for investigation by the police under Sec. 156(3), Cr. P. C. stands rejected." Thereafter, she took cognizance and transferred the case to the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Alipore for enquiry.