ANANYA MUKHERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this court for quashing of the charge sheet relating to an offence punishable under Section 204A of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 on the ground that no offence has been made out against the petitioner for which charge sheet has been submitted.

(2.) THE learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for quashing. However, in spite of repeated asking by this court, he has not been able to show either from the allegations made in the F.I.R. or from the charge sheeted materials any offence punishable under Section 204A of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 is made out.

(3.) A plain reading of the said provisions, goes without saying that such offence is attracted only when a new building or additional floor or floors of any building in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder is constructed and when such construction endangers or is likely to endanger human life or any property of the Municipality whereupon the water -supply, drainage or sewerage or the road traffic is disrupted or is likely to be disrupted, or is likely to cause a fire hazard. The basic requirements to constitute such offence is not only that there is a construction in contravention of the provisions of the said Act or rule framed thereunder, but the construction must be of such a nature which endangers or is likely to endanger human life or any property of the Municipality whereupon the water -supply, drainage or sewerage system is prevailed or the road traffic is disrupted or likely to be disrupted, or is likely to cause a fire hazard. Now, going through the allegations made in the F.I.R., I find except the allegation that the petitioner was making a construction at the premises in question in violation of Sub -Section (1) of Section 220 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 ignoring the Municipal notice, there was no further allegation, far less those allegations which are the foundation of an offence punishable under Section 204A of the said Act. I further find in their complaint, the complainant Bally Municipality requested the police to take steps in terms of Sub - Section (3) of Section 220 of the said Act. Meaning thereby police was requested for police posting for the purpose of preventing the petitioner to make any further construction, although at the same time request was made for taking other legal actions. Since the F.I.R. do not disclose commission of a cognizable offence police exceeded its jurisdiction to record the F.I.R. and to undertake the investigation.