Single judge quashed an order of cognizance passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate as it was mechanical and without reasons. The court also set aside the revisional order dismissing the writ petition.
Order of cognizance by Chief Judicial Magistrate set aside; order in Cr. Revision No. 90 of 2013 set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.26360 of 2013
| Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2012 Thana -KATORIA District- BANKA ====================================================== |
|---|
| Md. Ansar , son of Md. Maitul, Resident of village–Nemuwa, Police Station–Barahat, District Banka .... .... Petitioner/s Versus |
| 1. The State of Bihar |
| 2. Bhim Mandal, s/o Late Indeshwari Maandal, r/o village Inarabaran, P.S. Katoria District banka |
| .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : |
| For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Mukherjee |
| For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar (App) ====================================================== |
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Ajay Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anant Kumar, learned A.P.P.
The petitioner, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 2.5.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur in Cr. Revision No. 90 of 2013. By the said order the learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur has dismissed the revision, which was preferred against the order of cognizance dated 6.2.2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka, in Katoria P.S. Case No. 136 of 2012 / G.R.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26360 of 2013 (3) dt.23-06-2016
2/4
Case No. 1092 of 2012 registered for the offence under Section 457, 380, 411 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of cognizance passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka is palpably incorrect and liable to be set aside. He submits that F.I.R. was lodged against unknown. However, during investigation some suspicion was raised against the petitioner. Finally after thorough investigation police found no material against the petitioner and thereafter final report was submitted by the police exonerating the petitioner. Even though the petitioner was exonerated by the police and his name was not incorporated in column no. – 11 of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate without assigning any reason has passed the order of cognizance. He submits that though the order of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was required to be interfered by the revisional court, in a mechanical manner the Sessions Judge has rejected the revision petition.
In this case learned A.P.P. by way of referring to certain facts in the case diary submits that there is some material suggesting complicity of the petitioner, however he was not in a position to satisfy the court as to whether order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate specifies any reason for differing with
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26360 of 2013 (3) dt.23-06-2016
3/4
the police report. Normally after rejection of the revision petition against an order of the learned Magistrate a petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is considered as second revision, which is not maintainable, however, in special facts and circumstances of the present case particularly the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the court is of the opinion that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has passed the order of cognizance in a mechanical manner. On perusal of the material on record particularly Annexure – ‘3’ to the present petition it is evident that the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., was exonerated by the police and his name was not incorporated in column no. – 11 of the charge sheet. Once after thorough investigation police had submitted charge sheet in normal course the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at the time of differing with the police report was required to succinctly assign reason. On perusal of the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate the court is satisfied that no reason has been assigned. The police report may not be treated as a waste paper, if it is submitted after thorough investigation.
In view of the fact that order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate has been passed completely without application of mind, the same is set aside. Similarly revisional court’s order i.e.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26360 of 2013 (3) dt.23-06-2016
4/4
order passed in Cr. Revision No. 90 of 2013 is also set aside.
The petition stands allowed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J)
Praful/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an order of cognizance passed by a Magistrate without assigning reasons after thorough investigation and exoneration by police is mechanically passed and liable to be set aside.
Whether a writ petition under Section 482 CrPC is maintainable to quash an impugned order setting aside a police report.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Ansar
The State of Bihar
Bhim Mandal
Rakesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
