MADAN MOHANTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Perused the impugned order as well as the other materials on record.

(2.) IN this criminal revision the petitioner challenged an order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, dakshin Dinajpur, Balurghat in connection with G. R. Case No. 788/2006 arising out of Kumarganj P. S. Case no. 147 dated November 27, 2006 under sections 325/304/34 of the Indian penal Code, whereby the learned magistrate dismissed the protest petition of the defacto-complainant of the case, the petitioner herein, against non-submissions of the charge-sheet against two principal accuseds and for filing charge-sheet against five persons who according to the defacto-complainant were not involved in the commission of the alleged offences.

(3.) UPON perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned magistrate dismissed the said protest petition on the grounds, firstly, the police by filing supplementary charge-sheet included the said two accused persons who were not earlier charge-sheeted and secondly, as it transpires from the first Information Report that out of about fifteen persons involved in the alleged incident occurred at dark night, the defacto-complainant could identify only seven accuseds in the light of a torch whereas sufficient materials have been collected during the investigation as against those five persons who were not implicated in the FIR. The learned magistrate was of the further opinion that when the defacto-complainant could not even able to identify all the miscreants, he had no scope to say that the said five persons are not involved in the alleged incident.