The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK AFR CRLMC No.372 of 2023 Laxmi Rout and Others …. Petitioners Mr. Priya Ranjan Singh, Advocate and Mr. Santosh Kumar Dwibedy, Advocate -Versus- State of Orissa and Another …. Opposite Parties Mr. T.K. Praharaj, S.C., OP No.1 None for OP No.2
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
Decision
ORDER 09.02.2023 Order No. 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. None appears for opposite party No.2. 2. Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is at the behest of the petitioners for quashing of the FIR and the entire criminal proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No.208 of 2020 arising out of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 pending in the file of learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal on the grounds stated therein. 3. 4. Perused the copy of the FIR as at Annexure-1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complaint in 1.C.C. Case No.79 of 2019 was filed and therein during and in course of enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., the learned court below directed for an investigation by the local police. It is further submitted that on receiving such a direction, Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 was registered which is not permissible in law for the fact that it was for a limited purpose and Page 1 of 4 to investigate and submit a report before the learned court below. In other words, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that an illegality has been committed with the registration of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.208 of 2020. In fact, the learned court below after having learnt about a case being registered at the P.S. called for a report from the IIC, Dhenkanal by order dated 4th March, 2020 as to the circumstances under which the FIR was lodged upon a copy of the complaint sent for conducting investigation in terms of Section 202 Cr.P.C. But in the meantime, preliminary CS was filed keeping the investigation open in connection with G.R. Case No.208 of 2020. It is informed to the Court that 1CC Case No.84 of 2020 was filed against the petitioners and another, the proceeding of which was, however, discontinued in view of registration of Dhenkanal Town P.S. No.66 of 2020 and while contending so, he refers to the order of the learned court below as at Annexure-7 series. With the above submission, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that upon such a direction from the learned court below, the local PS could not have registered Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020, which is not tenable in law. While advancing such an argument, the learned counsel for the petitioners cited a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy and Ors. Vrs. V. Narayana Reddy and Ors. MANU/SC/0108/1976 and also the judgment of Karnataka High Court in U.Shivanna and Another Vrs. L.Anjannapa and others MANU/AA/0028/2001. 5. Mr. Praharaj, learned counsel for the State on the other hand opposed and objected to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners and justifies the investigation in connection with Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020. 6. A recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ramdev Food Products Private Limited Vrs. State of Gujarat (2015) 6 SCC 439 is cited at the Bar to apprise the Court as to the legal position Page 2 of 4 vis-à-vis enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and the role and responsibility of the IO in taking up investigation in terms thereof pursuant to the order of a Magistrate. In fact, such an order was passed by the learned court below with a direction to the local police to investigate and submit a report on the complaint in 1CC No.79 of 2019. The local police, however, treated the complaint and registered Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 dated 2nd March, 2020. The question is, whether, the case could have been registered upon receiving a direction from the learned court below to investigate as per Section 202 Cr.P.C. in connection with 1CC No.79 of 2019? 7. Law is enunciated in Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy (supra) that Section 202 Cr.P.C. is a provision which is invoked by the court for the purpose of enquiry during and in course of which police investigation may be directed for the purpose of deciding, whether or not, there is sufficient ground for proceeding and the object of an investigation is not to register a fresh case but to assist the Magistrate in completing the proceeding instituted upon a complaint. The said legal position has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Ramdev Food Products Private Limited (supra). The decision in Devarapalli Lakshminarayana Reddy (supra) is referred to by Karnataka High Court in U.Shivanna (supra) and it is held therein that a case can be registered only if a direction is received in terms of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. but the role of police to investigate as per Section 202 Cr.P.C. is not to register any such case but to enquire and submit a report before the court. 8. In view of the settled position of law as discussed hereinabove, the Court is of the view that in the instant case, when there was an order from the learned court below to investigate and to report back and the direction is in terms of Section 202 Cr.P.C., what the local police was to do was to enquire and respond to it but not to register a case like a case registered later to a direction Page 3 of 4 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. In other words, in the present case, the local PS could not have registered a case pursuant to the order of the learned court below passed during enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The said fact was also well within the knowledge of the learned court below and therefore, it called for a report from the IIC concerned to explain, as to the circumstances under which, such a case was registered. So, therefore, for the reasons stated herein before, the inevitable conclusion of the Court is that the criminal proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No.208 of 2020 arising out of Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 cannot be sustained in law and hence, it is required to be quashed. 9. Accordingly, it is ordered. 10. In the result, the CRLMC stands allowed. As a necessary corollary, the FIR as well as the criminal proceeding in connection with Dhenkanal Town P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No.208 of 2020 pending in the file of leaned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal is hereby quashed with a consequential direction to the concerned I.O. to submit a report in response to the order of the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal in 1.C.C. Case No.79 of 2019 and on receipt of the same, the court below shall consider it and proceed to dispose of the complaint as per and in accordance with law. Consequently, the learned court below is at liberty to pass necessary orders vis-à-vis 1.C.C. Case No.84 of 2020 which is an upshot of G.R. Case No.208 of 2020. U.K.Sahoo (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Page 4 of 4