Dhiraj Dey vs State Of Assam And 3 Ors

The Court proceedings have been conducted through Video-Conference due to Covid-19 pandemic.

Petitioner is represented by Mr. M.K. Borah, learned counsel.

State is represented by Mr. Bankim Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

This is an application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking quashment of the FIRs of Fatashil Ambari Police Station Case No. 17/2008 and Garchuk

Police Station Case No. 47/2018.

I have perused the petition.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Fatashil Ambari Police Station Case No. 17/2008, under Section 436 of the IPC

was registered on 30-01-2008 in respect of an occurrence involved in this case. However, on the same FIR, another case being Garchuk Police

Station Case No. 47/2018, under Section 436 of the IPC was also registered.

In the FIR, at page 34 and 35 respectively, it is found that although Garchuk Police Station registered the case being Garchuk Police Station Case No.

47/2018 yet there is a note above the note registering the case that Fatashil Ambari Police Station Case No. 17/2008 was registered on 30-01-2008.

However, it appears from the FIR at page 22, annexed with the petition that Garchuk Police Station entered the FIR vide GD Entry No. 429, dated

29-01-2008 and thereafter, forwarded the same to the Officer-in-Charge of Fatasil Ambari Police Station for registering a case. Thereafter, Fatasil

Ambari Police Station registered the case being Fatashil Ambari Police Station Case No. 17/2008, whereas in the FIR at page 34-35, on the same

facts has been has been registered by Garchuk Police Station as Garchuk Police Station Case No. 47/2018.

It appears from the contents of the FIRs that in both the cases allegation is exactly the same.

Such position appears to be so confusing that it is difficult, at this stage, to take a view as to in which police station has, in fact, registered and

investigated into the case or both the police stations have registered and investigated into the case. That apart, there is no materials available before

this Court also to indicate as to under what circumstances the FIR was lodged in the year 2008, on the basis of which Fatashil Ambari Police Station

registered the Case No. 17/2008, had to be registered again by Garchuk Police Station as Garchuk Police Station Case No. 47/2018, i.e., 10 years

after filing of the original FIR.

That being so, the Investigating Police Officer of Garchuk Police Station Case No. 47/2018 is directed to place the scanned copy of the case diary

along with a report from him as to under what circumstances the case was registered, as indicated above, inspite of the fact that the same FIR was

forwarded to Fatashil Ambari Police Station, which also registered a case in the year 2008 itself.

The Officer-in-Charge of Fatashil Ambari Police Station is also directed to transmit to this Court, a scanned copy of the case diary along with a status

report of Fatashil Ambari Police Station Case No. 17/2008.

In the meantime, further proceeding of Garchuk Police Station Case No. 47/2018 is stayed till the next date fixed.

However, there is no bar in continuation of the investigation, if any, in respect of Fatashil Ambari Police Station case. However, this part of the order

is passed in view of absence of any material before this Court to the effect that investigation of the Fatasil Ambari Police Station has already been

completed.

A copy of this order be furnished to learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Sarma, during the course of the day.

Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor shall collect the materials, as indicated above, from the respective police station and place before this

Court on the next date fixed.

Accordingly, list the matter on 14-07-2021.