Dismissed

Dilip Kalita v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC11 Jan 2021Crl.Pet./429/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding Sections 120(B)/188/379/427 IPC read with Section 19 of Assam Hill Land and Ecological Sites Act. Court held petition devoid of merit and dismissed it, allowing trial to proceed as per existing charges.

What did the court decide?

Disappointment of the criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as devoid of merit.

Dilip Kalita Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010117612020

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet./429/2020

¶5

DILIP KALITA

¶6

S/O LATE KANORAM KALITA, VILL-BAMUNDI, P.S.-SUALKUCHI, DISTKAMRUP, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

2:THE CIRCLE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE HAJO DIST-KAMRUP ASSA

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K JAIN

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 11-01-2021

¶16

Heard Mr. A.K. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P., Assam, Mr. B.B. Gogoi for the State Respondent.

¶17

By this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Criminal Proceeding in Sualkuchi Police Station Case No. 21/2012 registered under Sections

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

120(B)/188/379/427 IPC read with Section 19 of the Assam Hill Land and Ecological Sites (Protection and Management) Act, 2006 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 90/2012.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially an FIR was lodged by the respondent No. 2, where 8 persons were named as the offender and present petitioner was not named in the FIR. However, in the meantime police has completed investigation and submitted charge-sheet where in the petitioner is arrayed as an accused. It is also submitted that on the basis of the said chargesheet the learned trial Court has taken cognizance, issued process and charges were also framed under Sections 120(B)/379/427/188 I.P.C.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Magistrate can not take cognizance on the basis of the police report for an offence under Section 188 Cr.P.C. in view of the bar created by Section 195(1) Cr.P.C. and therefore the proceeding should be quashed.

¶22

It appears that charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner and other Co-accused persons under Sections 120(B)/188/379/427 IPC read with Section 19 of the Assam Hill Land and Ecological Sites (Protection and Management) Act, 2006 besides Section 188 of the IPC. However, charges were framed under Sections 120(B)/427/379/188 I.P.C. Even if, it is assumed for the sake of argument that the learned Magistrate is debarred from taking cognizance of offence under Section 188 Cr.P.C. on the basis of police report, in view of bar created by Section 195 Cr.P.C., the cognizance is not barred in respect of other offences.

¶23

Further contention of Mr. Jain is that the petitioner had valid order for stone crashing using explosive and produced a document to that effect. Referring to said document Mr. Gogoi pointed out that validity of the permission was over long before the occurrence. Be that as it may, the accused petitioner can very well raise the defence of valid permit during the trial and as such prosecution can not be quashed on the basis of the defence raised by the petitioner in as much as, in a proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. this Court can not undertake a parallel enquiry as to the merit of the case.

¶24

In view of above, this Criminal petition is found to be devoid of merit. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Dilip Kalita v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kalita v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subrata Choudhury @ Santosh Choudhury and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Nilakshi Bhuyan and Anr. Vs Rekhamoni Buragohain

Urmimala Baruah and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Mainul Haque Chaudhury Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Monjit Kumar Nath Vs Moloya Saikia

Salimuddin Ali and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.