Rajiv Kumar Ram @ Rajiv Ram v. The State Of Bihar Through The Home Commissioner, Govt. Of Bihar.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.364 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2021 Thana- BHELDI District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Rajiv Kumar Ram @ Rajiv Ram, Son of Nawal Kishore Ram @ Jai Ram Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 2.
Ranjan Ram @ Ranjan Raaz, Son of Nawal Kishore Ram @ Jai Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 3.
Chandan Ram @ Chandan Kumar Ram, Son of Chulhai Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 4.
Kundan Kumar Ram @ Kundan Kumar, Son of Chulhai Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 5.
Chulhai Ram, Son of Late Janki Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
6.
Saroj Devi, W/o Jagdeop Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
7.
Jagdeo Ram Son of Late Sita Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
8.
Panna Devi, w/o Chulhai Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
9.
Jai Ram @ Nawal Kishore Ram, Son of Late Janki Ram, Resident of Village - Molnapur, P.s.- Bheldi, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Home Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar. 2.
The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Zone, Muzaffarpur. 4.
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Saran Range at Chapra. 5.
The Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chapra. 6.
The Sub-Divisional Police Office, Marhaura, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 7.
The Officer in charge, Bheldi Police Station, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. 8.
The Investigation officer, Bheldi police Station, Distt. Saran at Chapra. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Iqbal Asif Niyazi, AC to GP-5.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-10-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners shall remove all
2/8 the defects as pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within three weeks from today.
Heard Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Iqbal Asif Niyazi, learned A.C. to G.P.5 for the State.
Petitioners, in the present case, are seeking the following reliefs:- "(I) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs order/orders direction/directions for proper and fair investigation of Bheldi P.S. Case No. 190 of 2021 dated 16.06.2021 registered under Section 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 379, 354, 504, 506 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) For quashing FIR of Bheldi P.S. Case No. 190 of 2021 dated dated 16.06.2021 registered under Section 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 379, 354, 504, 506 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code instituted and pending against the petitioners.
(iii) For direction upon the respondent authorities particularly Respondent No. 5 to 9 to exonerate the petitioners from the present case as the petitioners are being implicated in the present case without any material/substance which would be reflected from the facts stated hereunder.
(iv) For direction upon the respondent authorities of Saran police administration not to implicate the petitioners in any false and fabricated case only on the basis of created documents and on the basis of political dispute in the local area.
(v) For grant of the other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."
Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits that at this stage he is confining his prayer no. (i) reserving his right to move this Court afresh, if occasion so
3/8 arises, for quashing of the F.I.R. and other directions as prayed in paragraph 1(ii) and (iii).
Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. As regards conduct of proper and fair investigation, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State submit that this Court has issued adequate directions to the investigating agency and the learned court below in Cr.W.J.C. No. 153 of 2017 and other analogous matters, and, if those directions are abide by in the present case as well, a proper and fair investigation may be assured to the petitioner. Having regard to the submissions noted above, this Court is disposing of this writ application with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chapra (respondent no.
5) and the competent court within whose jurisdiction the case is pending to investigate and monitor respectively properly to ensure fair investigation of the case. The directions issued vide order dated 09.09.2022 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 153/2017 (Surendra Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.)
4/8 appropriate application before the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police of the concerned district drawing his attention towards the pending investigation. The aggrieved person shall submit his stand by way of an application with all supporting materials in the office of Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police or send the same through registered post/speed post/email, as the case may be. A copy of the same shall also be sent to the investigating officer of the case.
(II) On receipt of such application from the aggrieved person, the Senior Superintendent of Police/ Superintendent of Police shall himself supervise the said case within a period of two weeks, wherever necessary he shall give a chance of hearing to the aggrieved person and all endeavours be made to consider the submissions as well as the materials produced before him.
(III) The Senior Superintendent of Police/ Superintendent of Police shall issue necessary instructions to any other supervising authority such as Dy.S.P. and also to the I.Os. of the case to complete the investigation from all angles within a reasonable period. What will be the reasonable period will depend upon the nature of the case and the kind of materials which are required to be dealt with. It is to be kept in mind that only because the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide for maximum limit within which an investigation is to be completed, it does not mean that the investigation is to be kept pending for decades. There are many judicial pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in which the prosecution has been quashed because the investigating agency failed to complete the
5/8 investigation of the case despite lapse of several years. Undue delay in completion of investigation erodes public faith and confidence in the investigating agency.
(IV) Upon receipt of a request/application /representation from a person connected with the case and aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the investigation alleging improper investigation, complaints of threat to him or his family or the witnesses by his opponents, accused or his associates, it is the Sr. Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police of the concerned district and the Station House Officer of the concerned police station as well as the I.O.
of the case who would be duty bound to enter or caused to be entered the information in the station diary of the police station and examine or caused to be examined the threat perception of the informant and/or his family members/witnesses and take appropriate steps at the earliest, in the cases where threat perceptions are found to be genuine, they would take immediate measures to protect the life of the person(s) under threat. Delay in examining the request/representation leading to any serious consequences shall in itself be a matter of enquiry and action against the erring police officials.
(V) As regards the grievance that accused persons are not being arrested in cases involving serious and heinous offences the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police/Investigating Officer shall take appropriate steps keeping in view the law and judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the subject. In the matter of absconding accused the I.O. must take immediate steps to arrest him and exhaust all other procedures in accordance with law with utmost expedition.
6/8 (VI) This Court has already reproduced the extracts from judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu (supra). In the light of the said judgment, this Court directs that in all these cases the learned Magistrate(s) in whose court the case is pending, shall, without seeking any application from the informant monitor the investigation. They are fully competent to take a view as to whether a proper investigation is taking place or not. Learned Magistrates are expected to exercise their powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to ensure that investigation of the case pending before the learned Magistrate is duly investigated.
If it is found that the Investigating Officer is not proceeding with the investigation expeditiously and is keeping the same pending without rhyme or reason and in the opinion of the learned Magistrate it is found to be a case of inaction on the part of the Investigating Officer, the learned Magistrate would be well within his powers to direct the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police to change the Investigating Officer, to supervise the case himself by the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police and to take appropriate measures in accordance with law. While exercising his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
7/8 investigation. What would be the nature of such direction(s) in a given case cannot be put in a straight jacket formula and it is for the learned Magistrate to look into this aspect of the matter on case to case basis. An application filed by an aggrieved person with prior service of copy upon the learned Public Prosecutor/A.P.P. seeking directions for proper investigation must be heard expeditiously and the same be disposed of within a period of 30 days from the date on which such application is moved before the learned Magistrate on the first date. If the learned Magistrate fails to exercise his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. either on his own or on filing of the application by the aggrieved person, an appropriate application may be brought before this Court for an order/direction and monitoring as the case may be.
(VII) If any of the directions issued by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the order of this Court as stated above to the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police/investigating officer, unless otherwise interfered with by a competent court of law, is not given effect to by the concerned authorities, it will be taken to be a case of contempt of this Court and the learned Magistrate may inform this Court as regards the willful disobedience or disregard shown to the order/orders, direction/directions issued by him in terms of this judgment. In such circumstance an aggrieved person may also file an application seeking initiation of contempt.
(VIII) All the stake-holders in the present writ applications shall act accordingly. A copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police, Bihar to enable him to issue necessary instructions at the earliest."
8/8 This application stands disposed of accordingly. Certified copy of this order shall be made available only after removal of the defects.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.