ANJANA MISHRA Vs. INDRAJIT RAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An affidavit filed by Shri Arniya Bhusan Tripathy, an ex -Director -General of Police, Orissa has generated a lot of heat, as is evident from the present misc. case. The affidavit has been filed in OJC No. 9929 of 1997, which was filed by Mrs. Anjana Mishra making certain allegations against Shri Indrajit Ray, the ex - Advocate General, who at the relevant point of time was functioning as Advocate General. The case was taken up along with OJC Nos. 9788, 9801, 9806 and 9862 of 1997. Considering certain unusual features which were noticed by this Court, investigation of the criminal case registered on the basis of first -information -report lodged by Mrs. Anjana Mishra was handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (in short, 'CBI'). OJC No. 9929 of 1997 was disposed of along with OJC Nos. 9413, 9788, 9801, 9806 and 10039 of 1997 by a common judgment dated 8.8.1 997. Subsequently grievance was made that Shri Amiya Bhusan Tripathy was not examined in a case referred to above, though he is a vital witness. The CBI was directed to indicate its stand. A counter affidavit was filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI, Special Branch, Calcutta. In Clause (c) of paragraph 3 of the affidavit it was stated that immediately after registration of the case, elaborate discussion was held by the CBI team of Investigators with Shri Amiya Bhusan Tripathy. After such discussion, it was not felt necessary to record the statement formally Under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code'). As no provision under the Code was brought to the notice of the Bench as to permissibility of such discussion and non -recording of statement Under Section 161 of the Code after registration of a cognizable -offence, notice was issued to Shri Tripathy to file affidavit as to what discussion took place between the officers of the CBI and himself as stated in the counter affidavit. The order was passed on 8.5.1998. The matter was listed on 28.8.1998, and the following order was passed. 'List it on 18.9.1998. In the meantime, affidavit shall be filed by Shri A.B.Tripathy'. After taking time, the affidavit has been filed. On 18.9.1998, the matter was placed before the Bench for consideration of the affidavit of Shri Tripathy. Following order was passed on that date. 'Perused the affidavit of Mr. A. B. Tripathy. Former Director General of Police. Mr. Sanjit Mohanty, learned counsel for the CBI has stated that he has received a copy of the same. According to Mr. Mohanty. CBI will take such action on the basis of statements made in the affidavit as it may deem fit and proper. xxx xxx xxx ' It is to be noted at this juncture that there was another writ application (OJC No. 1794 of 1998) which was filed making similar grievances. In view of the order dated 18.9.1998 passed on OJC No. 9929 of 1997. same was also disposed of.

(2.) IN the present misc. case, prayer has been made for an order of restraint/appropriate direction. According to the applicant, after the affidavit was filed by him, the Chief Minister of the State, several high placed officials and politicians have started smear campaign against him, though he had filed the affidavit pursuant to the direction given by this Court, and had stated what was within best of his knowledge. Motives have been attributed and State machineries have been issued. It has been highlighted that though the matter was to be listed on 18.9.1998, before the date, the Chief Minister and several officials have rushed to the press. This has created a panic. Since the applicant apprehended danger to his life, on his request protection was provided to him by this Court. There has been character assassination. Even an affidavit has been sworn to by a high placed police official, Shn A.K.Patnaik, a retired Director General of Police, who has tried to contradict certain statements made in the applicant's affidavit. It is stated that how he was interested in the matter is not understood. It is pleaded that before the matter was taken up by this Court, the sudden rush to the press was nothing but an attempt to hush up the matter and to obstruct the cause of justice. It is stated that the acts clearly show an attempt to draw red -herrings to divert attention from truth. - - - -

(3.) AT this juncture it'is necessary to take note of the affidavit filed by Shri Tripathy. Same was filed in this Court on 1 6.9.1 998, though a copy was supplied on 15.9.1998 to the learned counsellor CBI and a copy was handed over to one Shri Kanhu Charan Misra on 15.9.1998. who received the copy as petitioner though he was not To keep the records straight, it is necessary to indicate thai in the affidavits filed by Shri Tripathy, Shri A. K. Patnaik and Shri G.R.Patnaik. K.C.Mishra has been stated to be the petitioner in OJC No. 9929 of 1997. In reality petitioner was Smt. Anjana Mishra