Chandrani De Bhowmick vs The State of West Bengal & Anr

Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the order passed by learned

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baruipur in GR case no. 1645 of 2014 dated

07.06.2014, the petitioner/ defacto complainant has filed this revisional

application on amongst other grounds that no notice was served upon the

defacto-complainant at the time of filing the report in final form by the

investigating officer before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and that

without serving any notice upon the defacto complainant learned Additional Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 211 of the

Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner. Learned Advocate appearing on

behalf of the petitioner contended that the case was initiated at the instance of

the present petitioner but the investigating officer submitted report in final form

exonerating the accused from such charges with a prayer for drawing up

proceeding under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code against the present

petitioner. It is submitted that in terms of the settled principle of law, it was

incumbent upon the Court as well as upon the investigating officer to serve

notice upon the defacto complainant to apprise her of the final result of such

investigation but without giving any opportunity to the defacto complainant,

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence

under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner in violation of

the decision of the Apex Court reported in 1985 (2) SCC 537 ( Bhagwant Singh

Vs. Commissioner of Police & Anr.).

Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the State fairly contended that no

notice was served upon the defacto complainant at the time of filing such report

in final form under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate at Baruipur. The certified copies of the order sheet also do not reveal

that any attempt was made on the part of the learned Court below to serve notice

upon the defacto complainant in respect of such report in final form submitted

by the investigating officer. That clearly goes to show that the order of

cognizance passed by learned Court below without giving any opportunity to the defacto complainant in respect of the repot in final form, appears to be contrary

to the law as enunciated in the decision referred to herein above. In that view of

this case the order of cognizance dated 07.06.2014 passed by learned Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baruipur in respect of GR case no. 1645 of 2014

arising out of Sonarpur police station case no. 416 of 2014 dated 25.03.2014 is

thus set aside.

Learned Magistrate is directed to issue notice to the defacto complainant in

respect of the report in final form submitted by the investigating officer and after

hearing the defacto complainant and the state shall dispose of the case in

accordance with law. Learned Magistrate is at liberty to decide the fate of the

prosecution submitted under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code against the

defacto complainant in accordance with law only after giving an opportunity to

the defacto complainant to submit her views in respect of the report in final form

submitted by the investigating agency of the state.

Let a copy of this order be forwarded the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Baruipur at once for his information and necessary action.

The criminal revisional application is thus disposed of.

No order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the

parties as expeditiously as possible.