RAJEN SINGH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party No. 3 herein, namely, Smti. Sukhasri Musahari lodged a complaint in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jonai, which gave rise to CR Case No. 5/99, the case of the complainant being, in brief, thus : Dead body of a home-guard personnel was found near Simen-Chapori Out Post. Following the discovery of the said dead-body, a team of police personnel, headed by the accused-petitioner, namely, Rajen Singh, the then Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Jonai, came, con 02.02.99, at about 12.00/1.00 p.m., to the complainant's village at Sonapun, which is located at a distance of about 4 km from the place, where the said deadbocly was found lying and assaulted complainant's son, namely, Raju Musahari, mercilesisly, took him away after damaging various articles lying at the complainant's house and also set fire to her dwelling house. On 04.02.99, the accused-petitioner along with a team of police personnel, once again, came to the house of Dharani Basumatary, where the Shradh ceremony of the mother of the Dharani Basumatary was being performed, the complainant's husband, Sobharam Basumaltary, was beaten so mercilessly that he passed stool in pain and agony, whereupon the police party took him away and that both Raju Musahari and Sobharam Basumatary are still kept in the custody.

(2.) The learned Court below held an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and by its order, dated 16.04.99, took cognizance of the offences under Section 109 read with Sections 436/427/323/34 IPC against the accused named in the complaint including the present accused-petitioner and directed issuance of summons to all of them.

(3.) By making this application under, inter alia, Section 483 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the accused-petitioner aforementioned has impugned the order, dated 16.04.99, aforementioned on the ground that the allegations levelled against him are completely false and baseless and that his prosecution for the offences alleged to have been committed by him is not maintainable, for, in the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, sanction for his prosecution under Section 197 Cr.P.C. read with Section 6 of the Assam Disturbed Areas Act, 1955, ought to have been obtained before taking cognizance. Having not obtained the requisite sanction, the prosecution of the accused-petitioner is wholly illegal and the impugned order, to the extent that the same directs issuance of summons to the accused-petitioner, may be set aside and quashed.