MASABBIR ALIMAJUMDAR Vs. TAZAMUL ALIBASKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J. M. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the respondents despite notice.

(2.) The facts in brief which relate to filing of this Criminal Revision are that an FIR was lodged on 4.2.93 by one Md. Tajamul Ali Laskar against the present petitioner and other two others namely, Azad Hussain Majumdar and Piyar Ali with Sonai Police Station alleging that accused persons trespassed to the complainant's land and caused grievous hurt to him on the same date. On the basis of such Ejahar, police registered a case being Sonai Police Station Case No. 36/93 and accordingly the investigation ensued. During the investigation, the police found no case against the accused person under Section 447 IPC. However, a prima-facie case was found against all those three accused persons including the petitioner under Section 323 IPC. Since the offence under Section 323 IPC was not a cognizable offence, the police eventually submitted a final report on 5.7.93. The trial court by its order dated 11.12.93 accepted the final report so submitted by the police and consequently discharged the accused persons.

(3.) Being aggrieved by such discharge, the complainant lodged the complaint case being Complaint Case No. 801c/94 on 23.2.94 before the learned Judicial Magistrate and the learned Magistrate by his order dated 13.7.94 took cognizance against all the accused persons under Section 447/323 IPC. Feeling aggrieved by such action of taking cognizance by the learned Magistrate, the present petitioner moved an application for dismissal of the complaint on the ground of limitation under Section 468 Cr. P.C. The learned Magistrate, upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and also taking into account the materials available on record, by his order dated 24.4.95 dropped the criminal proceeding holding that since punishment under Section 447 and 323 IPC is for a period of three months and one year respectively, the instant complaint was time barred, being filed after the expiry of one year period of limitation which had started from the date of occurrence i.e., 4.2.93. Against that order, the complainant moved a criminal revision petition, being Criminal Revision No. 29 (3)/95 before the learned Sessions Judge who transferred the same to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Cachar at Silchar and the learned Addl. Judge upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and also on perusal of the order dated 24.4.95 by his judgment dated 1.3.96 allowed the revision petition by setting aside the order dated 24.4.95 holding that the learned trial Magistrate did not consider the provision of law laid down under Section 470(1) Cr. P. C. It was observed therein that the period from 4.2.93, on which date the ejahar was lodged with Sonai Police being Sonai PS Case No. 36/93 to 11.2.93 when the learned Magistrate discharged the accused person after accepting the final report submitted by police on 5.7.93, should be excluded as per the provision of Section 470(1) Cr. P.C.