Sharad Kumar Suman Vs the State of Jharkhand

(2025:JHHC:34280)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.17 of 2022

------

Sharad Kumar Suman aged about 36 years son of Batish Prasad Yadav, resident of village Fort Area, Munger, P.O. Munger, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Munger, at present R.P.F. Sub Inspector, P.O. + P.S. Sahibganj (T), District Sahibganj. … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

… The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party

¶7

For the Petitioner : Ms. Nitu Sinha, C.G.C. For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. P.P. ------

¶8

P R E S E N T

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

¶11

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj in Criminal Revision No.31 of 2020 whereby and where under the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj rejected the Criminal Revision Application filed by the petitioner against the order dated 03.10.2020 passed by the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj in connection with Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020.

¶12

The brief fact of the case is that Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020 was registered involving the offences punishable under Section 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code. On the prayer made by the Inspector- R.P.F. Post, Sahibganj the case was transferred to the court of Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj by the learned Chief Judicial

¶13

1 Cr. M.P. No.17 of 2022

¶14

(2025:JHHC:34280)

¶15

Magistrate, Sahibganj. On 03.10.2020 a petition was filed by the Inspector Incharge, R.P.F. Post, Sahibganj praying for an order upon the Town Police Station for releasing the seized railway properties and for handing over the case file of Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020 to R.P.F. The learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj considered that the F.I.R. has been registered by the Sahibganj Town Police Station and investigation is going on. No separate complaint petition has been filed by the R.P.F. It also considered the settled principle of law that R.P.F. not being police but only a force, has no jurisdiction to investigate any F.I.R. It then considered the settled law that R.P.F. cannot investigate and file a police report. R.P.F. can only file complaint and it is authorized to conduct inquiry. After inquiry, R.P.F. can submit 8Prosecution Report9 as opposed to police report. Thus, the R.P.F. has not been vested with the power to investigate any case. The learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj considered that it does not have any jurisdiction over the local limits of Sahibganj Town Police Station. The learned Railway Judicial Magistrate also considered that the Railway Judicial Magistrate has no jurisdiction under Chapter XIII of Code of Criminal Procedure, so, the Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj was not the proper forum to claim release of the case from the Sahibganj Town Police Station. The Railway Judicial Magistrate considered that there is no mandate of the legislature for vesting power upon any Judicial Magistrate to either stop or transfer the investigation. Hence, it rejected the prayer to hand over the case file of Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020 to the R.P.F.

¶16

¶17

Cr. M.P. No.17 of 2022

¶18

(2025:JHHC:34280)

¶19

Being aggrieved by the said order dated 03.10.2020, the petitioner filed Criminal Revision No.31 of 2020. The learned Sessions Judge considered that as the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate has no jurisdiction to take cognizance in the case investigated by the Sahibganj Town Police Station, hence, vide order dated 09.03.2021, the case record has been transferred to the court of C.J.M., Sahibganj. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The offence alleged was not committed within the purview of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 rather the accused persons were not arrested for commission of the offences punishable under the penal provisions of Indian Penal Code and thus, finding no merit, dismissed the Criminal Revision.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the seized materials are Railway Properties, therefore, the R.P.F. has the jurisdiction to inquire about the entire case. The learned courts below mechanically and without applying the judicial mind, have wrongly passed the order. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed.

¶21

Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submits that the undisputed fact remains that the R.P.F. has not instituted any complaint in respect of the property. There is no explanation forthcoming on behalf of the R.P.F. as in fact any offence has been committed under the penal provisions of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 and why the R.P.F. has not lodged any complaint in respect of such offence. It is next submitted that the

¶22

3 Cr. M.P. No.17 of 2022

¶23

(2025:JHHC:34280)

¶24

undisputed fact remains that the R.P.F. is not entitled to conduct any investigation or to submit any Final Report in terms of Section 173 of Cr.P.C. The undisputed fact also remains that the investigation of the case is already over and the case is fixed for evidence of the prosecution. The undisputed fact further remains that the Railway Judicial Magistrate does not have any power to make any direction to the Officer Incharge of Sahibganj Town Police Station. Under such circumstances, certainly the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate was not the competent court to allow the prayer of transferring the case file of Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020 to anyone and rightly the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, being without any jurisdiction, has rejected the prayer and as there was no illegality in the order passed by the Railway Judicial Magistrate which was impugned in the Criminal Revision before the Sessions Judge so, the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj has rightly dismissed the Criminal Revision and as there is no illegality either in the order dated 03.10.2020 passed by the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj or in the order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

¶25

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the undisputed fact remains that the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj has not been vested with the power to make any direction to the Officer Incharge of Sahibganj Town Police Station. So, the prayer made before the learned Railway

¶26

¶27

Cr. M.P. No.17 of 2022

¶28

(2025:JHHC:34280)

¶29

Judicial Magistrate was beyond the jurisdiction of Railway Judicial Magistrate. The learned Railway Judicial Magistrate has in no uncertain manner has mentioned that he is rejecting the petition as he is not authorized to make any direction to the Sahibganj Town Police Station. Besides rightly mentioning that the R.P.F. is not vested with the power to investigate any case. The undisputed fact remains that the investigation of the case is already over and the case has now been transferred to the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj and subsequently it has been transferred to a Judicial Magistrate of Sahibganj.

¶30

There is no explanation forthcoming that if at all any offence punishable under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966, is in fact, made out as claimed by the petitioner; then till today why no complaint has been filed by the R.P.F.

¶31

Under such circumstances, this Court do not find any illegality in the order dated 03.10.2020 passed by the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate in Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.108 of 2020 as there was no illegality in the said order. The learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj has rightly dismissed the Criminal Revision No.31 of 2020 having no illegality in the order impugned before it.

¶32

Accordingly, there being no illegality either in the order dated 03.10.2020 passed by the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj or in the order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj, this Court do find any justifiable reason to interfere with the

¶33

¶34

Cr. M.P. No.17 of 2022

¶35

(2025:JHHC:34280)

¶36

same in exercise of its power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal

¶37

Procedure.

¶38