Shri Rupin Dang v. Stae Of Union Territory Of Andaman And Nicobar

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

CRR/30/2022 With IA No. CRAN/1/2022 Shri Rupin Dang ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar ... Respondent Mr. Abhimanshu Dhyani ...for the Petitioner Ms. A.S. Zinu ...for the Respondent November 17, 2022 [MAM] Item No. 11 This Revisional Application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing of or setting aside the order dated 30.09.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Port Blair in Special Case No. 01 of 2018.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner Rupin Dang is the Managing Director of the Company under name and style "Wilderness Films India Ltd.", but the Investigating Officer after completing the investigation, submitted charge sheet against him personally under section 8B of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation, 1956 (For short PAT Regulation, 1956). But the learned Sessions Judge by the order impugned has taken cognizance of the offence under section 3(i) (r ) SC & ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2016 read with sections

7/8(4)/8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956 and issued summons accordingly. Learned Counsel submits that the papers annexed to the charge sheet reveal that no offence under the aforesaid sections is attracted against his client. Learned Counsel argues that if cognizance of the offence under section 8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956 is taken into consideration for judicial notice, in that event the offence should be tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and not by the learned Sessions Judge. In such context, learned Counsel emphasizes that the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is liable to be set aside.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State submits if cognizance of the offence under sections 3(i) (r ) SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2016 read with sections 7/8(4) of the PAT Regulation, 1956 is not taken, there is no fetter on the part of the learned Trial Judge to proceed with trying the offence under section 8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956.

Learned Counsel appearing for the parties are in ad idem that the offence under section 8B of the aforesaid Regulation is triable by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Andaman.

As it appears from the Revisional Application, the petitioner Rupin Dang, the Managing Director of a company under name and style "Wilderness Films India Ltd." was arrayed as an accused in connection with FIR No. 219 of

2017 dated 09.11.2017 under section 3(i) (r) SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2016 read with sections 7/8(4)/8 B of the PAT Regulation 1956 registered with PS, Central Crime Station. The Investigating Officer after completing the investigation submitted charge sheet against the petitioner only under section 8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956. The other sections of alleged offence either under SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2016 or under the PAT Regulation, 1956 were dropped.

In such context, the relevant portion of the charge sheet may be exerted as follows:- "From the investigation carried out so far sufficient evidence have been found against Mr. Rupin Dang, Managing Director of Wilderness Films India Ltd. for uploading 10 videos of Jarawas in Youtube channel in the year 2015 - 2016. He removed those videos from Youtube channel upon the direction of the Investigating Officer. It is evident that PAT Regulation 1956 was amended in 2012 and videos were uploaded in Youtube channel by Wilderness Films India Ltd in 2015 - 2016. As per section 8B of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation, whoever in comprehension of the provision of sub-section II of section 7A permits Tourism Activities through any advertisements relating to aboriginal tribes directly or indirectly he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to 10,000/- rupees.

Further, section 3(i) (r ) SC & ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2016 read with sections (7/8(4)/8 B of the PAT Regulation,1956 will not attract in the instant case, hence these are dropped.

The charge sheet for the CS No.29 of 2021 dated 16th June, 2021 under Section 8(B) of the PAT Regulation, 1956 is being submitted before the Hon'ble Court against the accused Rupin Dang, Managing Director, Wilderness Films India Ltd. Supplementary charge sheet shall be filed after getting the details of uploading of videos from Youtube channel."

Perusal of the charge sheet and the relevant papers shows that the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner only under Section 8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956. But it is evident from the impugned order dated 30th September, 2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge that the learned Sessions Judge on consideration of the charge sheet took cognizance of all the offences which were mentioned in the FIR. The impugned order does not show any reason by which the learned Sessions Judge took cognizance of all the offences as mentioned in the FIR departing from the prima facie case as made out in the charge sheet.

I think that the learned Court below passed the order mechanically without applying judicial mind and without going through all the relevant papers.

So far as the offence under Section 8B of the PAT Regulation, 1956 is concerned, it is the learned Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class or the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate who may take cognizance of the offence. Accordingly, the learned Sessions Judge, A & N Islands is directed to transmit the case record to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, A & N Islands for consideration of taking cognizance of the offence under Section 8B of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation, 1956.

With the aforesaid direction the revisional application stands disposed of.

Connected application being IA No. CRAN 1/2022 also stands disposed of.

No order as to costs.

Let a copy of the order be sent to the learned Sessions Judge immediately.

(Rabindranath Samanta, J.)