Disposed

Azadul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Aug 2024WP(C)/3952/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged inaction by police on his FIR (Chapar PS Case No. 107/2024) under IPC and POCSO provisions and sought a writ directing proper investigation. Following Sakiri Vasu, the court held the Section 156(3) CrPC remedy before the Magistrate was appropriate and disposed of the writ petition with liberty to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC; writ petition disposed of.

Azadul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010154912024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3952/2024

¶5

AZADUL ISLAM

¶6

S/O- AYUB ALI, RESIDENT OF HATIPOTA PART-II, P.O. HATIPOTA, P.S. CHAPAR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783348

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781006

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM P.O. ULUBARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781007

¶11

3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM P.O. ULUBARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781007

¶12

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHUBRI P.O. AND P.S. DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DHUBRI

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

P.O. AND P.S. DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301

¶15

6:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE CHAPAR POLICE STATION P.O. AND P.S. CHAPAR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78334

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.A.R Karim Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. S. Sarma

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 09.08.2024

¶20

Heard Mr. A. A. R. Karim, the learned counsel appearing on behalf the petitioner. Mr. S. Sarma, the learned counsel appears on behalf of all the respondents.

¶21

The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner had lodged an FIR which was registered as Chapar P.S. Case No. 107/2024 dated 08.07.2024 under Sections 365/342/376/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 4/17 of the POCSO Act, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 309/2024 at Chapar in the district of Dhubri. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent authorities have not taken any steps to properly investigate the said crime properly and have also not taken due action against the accused. Under such circumstances the petitioner had also submitted a representation to the respondent No. 2 for taking due action which however has not been taken. In that view of the matter, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition.

¶22

The law is well settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs State of U.P. and others reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409, which is also followed by various other judgements of the Supreme Court that a writ petition ought not to be entertained in view of the expressed provision under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being available. Under such

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

circumstances, this Court would not like to entertain the instant writ petition. 4. Be that as it may, the petitioner herein would be at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 if the petitioner is aggrieved by the investigation so carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer of Chapar PS Case No.107/2024.

¶25

It is however observed that in such circumstances if the petitioner files such application in accordance with law, the concerned Magistrate shall duly consider the same as per the extant law.

¶26

With the above observation and direction the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Azadul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azadul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tezpur Iddgah Committee and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Niladhar Deka Vs the State of Assam 4 Ors. .

Dilip Chandra Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Pradip Kumar Dey Vs the Bar Council of India and 4 Ors.

Sachin Kumar Sharma Vs Amar Jyoti Barthakur and Anr.

Jiban Krishna Kundu, Vs Jugal Kishor Pareek and 5 Ors.