ROSENDRA CHANDRA DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Petition, made under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'the Code'), puts to challenge the order, dated 17. 12. 2007, passed, in G. R. Case No. 2292/2006 (Corresponding to Dholai P. S. Case No. 157/2006), whereby the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Silchar, has turned down the informant-petitioner's prayer for a direction to the police to further investigate the case in terms of Section 173 (8) of the Code.

(2.) THE principal question, which the present Criminal Petition raises, is this: Whether a magistrate, on his own motion or an application made by an informant, direct, 'further investigation', into a case, by the police, under Section 173 (8) of the Code, after the Magistrate has already accepted the police report (i. e. , charge-sheet) submitted under Section 173 (2) of the Code, whereby the police had found materials only against one or some of the accused named by the informant in the First Information Report (in short, 'the FIR') and not against all the accused named by the informant in his F. I. R. , and the Magistrate, having taken 'cognizance' on the basis of such a report, had issued process to only that accused-person against whom the police had submitted charge-sheet and when, in compliance with the process, so issued, the accused has already appeared in the Court? Yet another question, which instantly arises, is this: When an informant names more than one persons, in the F. I. R. , as accused and the police, upon investigation, submits its report, under Section 173 (2), to the effect that it has found materials only against one or some of the persons named as accused in the FIR and not against all, who had been named as accused by the informant, whether a Magistrate is, before accepting such a report and/or before taking 'cognizance' of offence (s) on the basis of such a report, bound to issue notice to the informant and, if no notice is issued to the informant in such a case, what is the remedy available to the informant or to the person, who may be interested in effective prosecution of all the persons named in such an F. I. R. ?

(3.) BEFORE dealing with the questions, posed above, let me set out the material facts and various stages, which have led to the making of the present Criminal Petition: