NANDA KISHORE MAHARANA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner who is the informant has filed this writ application praying for a direction to the opposite parties to hand over investigation to the C.B.I, to investigate into the offence alleged.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner as narrated in the FIR is that on 11.3. 2005 at about 8.30 A.M. he received information that the dead body of his brother Rama Kishore Maharana was seen hanging from the iron ladder within the premises of Sub -Collector's office. After receiving the information, he reached the spot and found that the police had already brought down the dead body and it was lying on the floor. He also alleges that he had seen injuries on hand, neck as well as thigh of the deceased. Suspecting the same to be a murder, upon inquiry he learnt that on 9.3.2005 the deceased had gone to the office of the Sub -Collector and on the said date some lawyers were shouting at some of the Sikshya Sahayakas including the deceased and were threatening to kill him. The allegation of the petitioner is that the said F.I.R. is not being registered and investigation is not being taken up. The learned Counsel for the State has produced the Case diary, which shows that after recovery of the dead body from the premises of the Sub -Collector's office, U.D. Case No. 4 dated 11.3.2005 has been registered and inquiry was taken up. During inquiry it was found that on 9.3.2005 the deceased was distributing blank affidavit forms to the candidates appearing for appointment as Sikshya Sahayak carrying signatures of an Advocate and a Notary Public. Such conduct of the deceased was objected to by some of the advocates and the matter has subsided on the very same day. The dead body of the deceased was found two days after in the office premises of the Sub -Collector. Postmortem report also shows that there was ligature mark on the neck and it was sufficient to cause death. It was also found that there were no external antemortem injuries or sign of struggle over the body and, therefore, the Officer inquiring into the matter was of the opinion that possibility of suicidal hanging cannot be ruled out. Further, from the Case diary it appears that the matter has not been closed and inquiry is going on. So far as FIR of the petitioner is concerned, it is stated by the Learned. Counsel for the State that since an U.D. Case has already been registered, the FIR lodged by the petitioner had been received and was entered in the Stationery Diary vide Station Diary Entry No. 243 dated 13.3.2005 at 5.30 P.M.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that after receiving information about death of the deceased, an U.D. Case has already been registered and an inquiry has already been taken up. There is also no dispute that the inquiry is still continuing and has not been concluded. There is also no dispute that the FIR lodged by the petitioner has been accepted and registered as Station Diary Entry. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for a direction to hand over investigation to the CBI. In this connection, a recent decision of the Apex Court is of great bearing. In the Case of Hari Singh v. State of Utter Pradesh reported in AIR 2006 SCW 3230 the Apex Court held as follow :