KANSHI RAM Vs. NAGESH KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 6.9.2003 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bilaspur dismissed the complaint filed by the Petitioner on two grounds. Firstly, that it could not take cognizance of the complaint in so far as the three Government officials were concerned since no sanction under Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure had been obtained despite the specific allegations that they had committed criminal offences by failing to perform their duties under law. The learned trial Court also found that there was no sufficient ground for proceeding against other accused who had been named in the original complaint.

(2.) IT would be pertinent to mention that originally the complainant filed a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against D.F.O. Bilaspur, Range Officer, Jhandutta, Range Officer, Kalol, Baldev Dass and Devender, Forest Contractors. In the complaint itself it was mentioned that the name of the other forest contractors should be disclosed by the Forest Department. The learned CJM did not mark this case to the police and himself recorded some evidence. Later he directed that inquiry in the matter be conducted by the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur. The post of Dy.S.P. was lying vacant at the relevant time and therefore, the matter was referred back to the Court by the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur. Subsequently, vide order dated 20.09.1999 the learned CJM directed that the inquiry in the matter be conducted by the Assistant Superintendent of Police. Thereafter, he monitored the inquiry of the Assistant Superintendent of Police. He was finally not satisfied by the report submitted by the Assistant Superintendent of Police. Thereafter, the matter was transferred to the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bilaspur. On 12.3.2001 the JMIC, Bilaspur passed an order directing the Officer -in -charge of Police Station, Sadar, Bilaspur to register a case against the offenders under appropriate Sections and to conduct fair investigation in the matter. This order was challenged by the Forest Contractors as well as the officials and was set -aside by this Court on 28th August, 2001. This Court held that once the Magistrate had proceeded with the complaint in accordance with the provisions of Sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the learned Magistrate had no option but to proceed with the case in the manner provided by the law and could not direct the registration and investigation of the case under Section 156(3). Thereafter, the matter went back to the learned Magistrate. No further inquiry was held. It appears that the complainant also made no effort whatsoever nor made any request to the Magistrate that he wanted to examine any witnesses in support of its complaint.