9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port back. In our opinion, both the learned Additional Sessions Judge and the High Court erred in coming to the conclusion that the same is hit by Section 161 or 162 of the Code which, in our considered opinion, has absolutely no bearing on the question involved. Section 161 or 162 of the Code does not refer to registration of a case, it only speaks of a statement to he recorded by the police in the course of the investigation and its evidentiary value. Thus, this appeal succeeds and the impugned orders of the High Court and the learned Additional Sessions Judge are set aside and that of the Magistrate restored. - N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha And A.K. Mathur, JJ. For the Appellant : Jitender Mohan Sharma, Sandeep Singh, C. Siddarth and Arun Bhardwaj, Advs For the Respondent : K.P. Singh, S. Ali, J.P. Dhanda and Shipra Ghose, Advs. JUDGMENT N. Santosh Hegde, J. 1. This Court while grunting leave in this appeal doubted the correctness of the judgment of this Court in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and Ors. 2001CriLJ3329 , hence referred this case to Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for being heard by a larger Bench, in these circumstances this appeal is now before us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il, 2001 following an earlier judgment of the same court in the case of Ram Mohan Garg v. State of U.P. 1990 (27) A.C.C. 438 dismissed the Revision Petition. From the impugned judgment, it is seen in the said judgment of the Ram Mohan Garg v. State of U.P. a Division Bench of that Court had held :- So far as the registration of a cross case on the basis of the First Information report is concerned, that does not appear to be permissible after the investigation in inspect of a crime has commenced in views of the provisions of Section 162 Cr. P.C. However, it was always possible that during investigation of a crime the version set up in the first Information report may be found to be false-version and some other person really responsible to the crime may be chargesheeted after a fair investigation. Hence, it was not necessary that a fresh first information report should have been registered on the basis of Annexure-3 which is a letter dated 22-6-89 to the Director General of Police in view of the provision of Section 162 Cr. P.C. However, it is always permissible in law for an aggrieved person to file a complaint before the competent Magistrate which can be investigated. Simultaneous ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne party a second FIR in the nature of counter case is not registrable and no investigation based on the said second complaint could be carried out. 12. Having perused the judgment in T.T. Antony's case, we really do not think this Court in that case has laid down any such proposition of law. 13. To understand the ratio of the judgment in T.T. Antony's case, it is necessary for us to note the facts of that case in brief : In the said case 2 incidents occurred on the very same day consequent to a decision taken by a Minister to inaugurate the function of an evening branch of a co-operative bank which was opposed by members of a political group and in that process the 1st incident took place in the proximity of the town hall at a place called Kutupuramba in Kerala and the second incident took place in the vicinity of a Police Station at the same place. During the said 2 incidents, on the orders of Executive Magistrate and Deputy Superintendent of Police, the police open fired as a result of which 5 persons died and 6 persons were injured amongst the demonstrators. In regard to the incident which took place near the town hall the police registered a Crime No. 353 of 1994 under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our view a case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs, not being a counter-case, filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offences alleged to have been committed in the course of the same transaction and in respect of which pursuant to the first FIR either investigation is under way or final report under Section 173(2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate, may be a fit case for exercise of power under Section 482 Cr. PC or under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution Emphasis supplied. 17. It is clear from the words emphasized hereinabove in the above quotation, this Court in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and Ors. has not excluded the registration of a complaint in the nature of a counter case from the purview of the Code. In our opinion, this Court in that case only held any further complaint by the same complainant or others against the same accused, subsequent to the registration of a case, is prohibited under the Code because an investigation in this regard would have already started and further complaint against the same accused will amount an improvement on the facts mentioned in the original complaint hence will be prohibi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... superintendence under Section 3 of the Act lacked the power to direct further investigation into the case. In reaching this conclusion we have kept out of consideration the provision contained in Section 156(2) that an investigation by an officer-in-charge of a police station, which expression includes police officer superior in rank to such officer, cannot be questioned on the ground that such investigating officer had no jurisdiction to carry on the investigation; otherwise that provision would have been a short answer to the contention raised on behalf of respondent 1. 20. This clearly shows that if concerned police refused to register a counter complaint, it is open to the Magistrate at any stage to direct the police to register the complaint brought to his notice and an investigate the same. 21. This Court in the case of Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Administration) 1979CriLJ1346 held :- From the above it is clear that even in regard to a complaint arising out of a complaint on further investigation if it was found that there was a large conspiracy than the one referred to in the previous complaint then a further investigation under the court culminating in another complaint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
