KRISHNA RABI DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question is whether it is permissible to exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. P. C. so as to record an order of discharge when most of the witnesses have been examined in the course of trial.

(2.) THE petitioner along with some other accused persons were charge-sheeted in connection with Purulia (T) Police Station Case No. 79 of 2008 dated 11th June. 2008 under Section 395 Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25/26 Arms Act. At the time of consideration of charge the petitioner made an application before the learned Additional Sessions judge, Fast Track Court No. 2 at Purulia on 12th January, 2009 praying for discharge from the case on the ground that he was not identified by any witnesses in the T. I. parade, nor was he named in the FIR, nor was there any incriminating material against him. At the time of consideration of charge, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that no case was there against the present petitioner as he was not present at the scene of commission of dacoity but he referred to the statements of two witnesses, namely, Amar Nath Singh and Dr. Debendra Nath Sharma. The learned judge recorded that the statements of the said two witnesses revealed that the petitioner supplied arms for dacoity but this portion of the statements under Section 161 Cr. P. C. which was written in the bottom of the statements were found interpolated later. Learned Judge decided to frame charge against the petitioner presumably taking into consideration that interpolation was made subsequently to the mischief of the prosecution and then trial proceeded after framing of charge. This order dated 15th january, 2009 whereby charge has been framed against the petitioner under Sections 395/120b of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 29 (b) of the Arms Act is under challenge. Charges were also framed against certain other accused persons by the said order dated 15th January, 2009.

(3.) THE petitioner took out this application under Section 482 of the cr. P. C. praying for discharge after setting aside the order dated 15th january, 2009 on the ground that there was no material before the learned judge to frame charges against the petitioner.