RAMJEE SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions have been heard at the admission stage analogous as the nature of grievances and the respondents in both the petitions are the same and similar, although, the petitioners are different.

(2.) IN Cr. W.J.C. No. 295/2000 the petitioner Ramjee Singh is the informant in respect of Masrakh P.S. Case No. 223/99 which was registered on 29.9.99 under Section 364/34 I.P.C. on an incident which occurred on 27.9.99 at 3 P.M. where accused persons arraigned were eleven persons including Respondent No. 8 Tarkeshwar Singh who is sitting M.L.A. of Bihar. In Cr. W.J.C. No. 297/2000 the petitioner Ashok Kumar Singh is the informant in respect of Masrakh P.S.Case No. 222/99 which was registered on 28.9.99 under Sections 364, 342,379/34 I.P.C. and in that case also Respondent No. 8 Tarkeshwar Singh, sitting M.L.A. of Bihar along with others were named as accused persons. Both the cases were being investigated by the Statutory Police of Masrakh Police Station. But at the fag end of the investigation it appears as per the counter -affidavit, a petition was filed by Respondent No. 8 Tarkeshwar Singh to the Respondent No. 4 Director General of Police and on the basis of that petition as per the counter -affidavit, a preliminary enquiry was made by the Respondent No. 5, Inspector General of Police, C.I.D. through his Inspector and a report was submitted and then an order was passed through Wireless Message on 5.11.99 for making over the investigation of both the cases to the C.I.D. It further appears from the counter -affidavit filed by both Respondent No. 8 and the C.I.D. that investigation was ordered to be made by an Officer of the C.I.D., but he could not take over charge. As he was transferred, then another Officer of the C.I.D. was appointed as Investigating Officer. But till the counter - affidavit has been filed by the C.I.D. when charge of the investigation could not be taken up by the C.I.D.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioners is that there was no scope for the Director General of Police to make any order for withdrawing of the investigation from the Statutory Police to the C.I.D. and such wireless message sent is without jurisdiction having no authority of the Director General of Police to that effect. The Respondent No. 8 wanted to be impleaded in this writ petition and as such he was impleaded and he also filed counter -affidavit. According to him, he had been falsely implicated in the politically motivated criminal cases which were registered on Polling days and thereafter in the last Assembly Election. According to Respondent No. 8, he was not at the spot where the occurrence took place as alleged and only to cloud his image these cases have been lodged against him and he found that he would be unnecessarily harassed in the cases and as such he had to make an application to the Director General of Police and the Director General of Police after preliminary enquiry made over the investigation of the cases to the C.I.D.