P VISWANATHAN Vs. A K BURMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 21/08/2000 rendered in Writ Petition No. 99 of 1999. By this judgment and order the learned single Judge granted part relief to the writ petitioner being the respondent No. 1 by directing the respondent No. 2 to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation with liberty to realize this amount of compensation or a part thereof from the respondent No. 2, viz., the appellant herein. Further liberty has been granted to the writ petitioner/respondent No. 1 to file a suit for damages against the respondents, viz., the appellant and the respondent No. 2 herein or any other officer against whom personal acts of malice, misfeasance or malfeasance might be pleaded and proved.

(2.) This case has chequered history which is put in a narrow compass as follows :- The respondent No. 1 at the relevant time was a registered medical practitioner and on the date of filing of the writ petition he had completed his practice for 16 years in a chamber situated at Kalpana Medical Store at Goalghar in the town of Port Blair. Pursuant to a complaint lodged by the then Superintendent of Police being the appellant the writ petitioner was arrested. The complaint was lodged purported to be under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 4 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987 (TADA for short). After being arrested the petitioner was placed in confinement followed by raid in his house. The petitioner had to remain in custody for about 100 days before he was granted bail by the Court on 13/12/1993. Even after being released on bail the case of the petitioner remained pending for more than four years as no charge-sheet was submitted. On submission of charge-sheet the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair upon considering the charges and the materials in support thereof produced declined to frame any charge holding that no case had been made out for proceeding against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner could get himself released by the aforesaid order dated 13/12/1993 as he filed a writ petition for quashing of the FIR. The said writ petition was heard finally by the Division Bench of this Court on a reference of the learned single Judge before whom the matter was pending for hearing. It is appropriate to record that in the writ petition the entire FIR was challenged, however, the Division Bench did not quash the FIR so far as it related to the complaint under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code but the complaint with regard to Sections 3 and 4 of TADA was set aside.