CHINTAMONI MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule was obtained against an Order dated 16th November, 1976 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Contained in case No. C. R. 428 of 1974 by which permission was given to the Assistant public Prosecutor to withdraw prosecution in that case.

(2.) THE petitioner's case is that on 7. 6. 73 at about 9 or 10 P. M. the opposite parties nos. 2 to 12 entered his house and looted about 150 mds. of paddy from the khamar after confining the inmates of the house in a room, f. I. R. was lodged on 8. 6. 73 and a case was started being Khejuri P. S. Case no. 5 (6) 73 under sections 143, 148, 380 and 382 of the Indian Penal Code. On 8. 11. 74 the police on completion of the investigation submitted charge sheet against the opposite parties under the aforesaid sections of the indian Penal Code. On 26. 11. 75 the learned Magistrate framed charges against the accused opposite parties under sections 147, 342 and 380 I. P. C. The charges were read over and explained to the accused persons who pleaded not guilty. On 2. 11. 76 the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor filed a petition praying for withdrawal of the case and by the impugned order the learned Magistrate gave permission to the same under section 494 (1)Cr. P. C. It is necessary to quote the relevant portion of the said order as arguments were advanced by both sides concerning the nature and character of the same. It is as follows:

(3.) MR. A. N. Mukherjee, learned advocate, appearing for the Petitioner argued that both the learned Public prosecutor and the learned Magistrate failed to apply their mind as would be evident from the recital of the sanction by the State Government and the district Magistrate. It was further argued that the reasons given by the learned Magistrate are not at all convincing and he failed to exercise his judicial function. Instead of applying his own mind the learned Magistrate has given permission on extraneous grounds. He called in question the right of the learned Magistrate to look into statements made under section 16. 1 cr. P. C. He also hinted at political pressure with change of government but when it was pointed out that the withdrawal was made before the new government came into office he readily withdrew the same and expressed regret.