Jagannath Madangi Vs State of Odisha

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order under Annexure-2 passed in ICC Case No.6 of 2024 arising out of G.R. Case No.132 of 2011 by learned S.D.J.M., Rayagada and to direct the said court to proceed with the complaint in accordance with law.

¶17

Mr. Sarangi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on an earlier occasion, this Court in CRLMP No.289 of 2014 disposed of on 20^th May, 2016 directed the DG of Police Crime Branch, Odisha to change the IO concerned and engage a competent and senior officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police to conduct investigation and to complete the same expeditiously. It is further submitted that such investigation has resulted in submission of final form before the learned court

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

below, later to which, a protest petition was filed by the petitioner complainant and the same instead of being treated as a complaint was again sent back to the PS concerned for registration of a case and investigation in terms of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as such it would be a futile exercise since investigation having been concluded earlier by the Crime Branch. According to Mr. Sarangi, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned court below was required to proceed with the complaint for its disposal according to law instead of police investigation once again exercising powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

¶20

Recorded the submission of Mr. Tripathy, learned AGA for the State.

¶21

Perused the soft copy of the LCR placed on record.

¶22

In fact, it would reveal from the record that the police investigation was taken up earlier by Crime Branch engaging a senior rank police officer which was pursuant to the Court’s order in CRLMP No.289 of 2014. Admittedly, such investigation led to submission of a final form. On receiving the final form, learned court below issued notice to the petitioner complainant, who responded to the same with the protest petition. On receipt of the protest petition, learned court below again sent it to the local PS for investigation exercising jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. In the considered view of the Court, such investigation by the local PS for the second time is unlikely to serve the purpose as earlier investigation resulted in submission of a final form. In other words, the view of the Court is that any such exercise with a police investigation would be meaningless for the reason that the earlier investigation so undertaken by a senior rank police officer pursuant to the Courts order in CRLMP No.289 of 2014 concluded with a

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

final form. Having said that, the Court is of the conclusion that learned court below instead of sending the complaint again for police investigation ought to have entertained it and to proceed for its disposal according to law. The Court is, hence, in agreement with Mr. Sarangi, learned counsel for the petitioner that further investigation by local PS is not to achieve any purpose and in any case, under the given circumstances, the learned court below is to proceed with the complaint for a decision as per law.

¶25

8. Hence, it is ordered.

¶26

In the result, the revision petition stands allowed. As a necessary corollary, the impugned order under annexure-2 passed in ICC Case No.6 of 2024 arising out of G.R. Case No.132 of 2011 by learned S.D.J.M., Rayagada is hereby set aside with a direction to the said court to proceed with the complaint for disposal of the same as per and in accordance with law.

¶27

10. LCR be sent back to the learned court below forthwith.

¶28

11. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶29

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶30

TUDU

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: THAKURDAS TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,CTC Date: 06-Aug-2024 19:24:19