Kamal Sk. vs The State of Jharkhand

Harish Chandra Mishra, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for he State.

Petitioners have filed this application for quashing the FIR in Pakur (M) P.S. Case No. 144 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 364 of 2011, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 337, 427, 436, 307, 353, 109, 149 of the IPC.

From the FIR, which has been lodged on the basis of the self statement of a police officer, it appears that the police officer lodging the FIR, was informed that an unruly mob had attacked Tilbhita Railway Station and were committing mischief, whereupon, the police party proceeded towards the place of occurrence. When they reached near the place of occurrence, they saw the mob of about four to five hundred persons and upon seeing the police party, they attacked the police party, committed mischief with them and also burnt the police Jeep. With this allegation only, the FIR was instituted against the petitioners and the other accused persons in Pakur (M) P.S. Case No. 144 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 364 of 2011 and investigation was taken up.

According to the petitioners'' case, this is the second FIR relating to the same occurrence and accordingly, this FIR is fit to be quashed. The first FIR is Rail Barharwa P.S. Case No. 05 of 2011, which was instituted for the offences under Sections 143, 427, 504, 337 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 174 of the Railway Act. The said FIR has been brought on record as Annexure-2 to this application. From perusal of this FIR, it appears that Rail Barharwa P.S. Case No. 05 of 2011 was instituted, on the basis of information given by the Station Master of Tilbhita Railway Station, stating that one lady was hit by one goods train, causing her death at the spot. Thereafter, the mob came to the railway station and they committed mischief and they also assaulted the railway officials and the RPF personnel, causing injuries to them. On this information, Rail Barharwa P.S. Case No. 5 of 2011 was instituted, in which also the petitioners have been made accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in Rail Barharwa P.S. Case No. 5 of 2011, the charge-sheet has already been submitted and this is the first FIR with respect to same occurrence. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the FIR in Pakur (M) P.S. Case No. 144 of 2011 being the subsequent FIR for the same occurrence, is fit to be quashed. In this connection, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the decisions of the Supreme Court of India in Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat and Others, , as also in T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala and Others, .

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

From perusal of both these FIRs, it is apparent that the first FIR in Rail Barharwa P.S. Case No. 5 of 2011 has been instituted by the rail police for the mischief committed at the railway station by the mob, in which railway officials were assaulted and injured. This occurrence has nothing to do with the occurrence that had taken place outside the railway premises, in which the mob attacked the police party, and committed mischief with them and also burnt the police vehicle. Admittedly, rail police cannot investigate the offence that had taken place outside the railway premises and similarly the general police cannot investigate the offence, which had taken place within the railway premises. This apart, the occurrence in both the cases are quite different. In that view of the matter, both these FIRs relates to separate occurrence, though committed by the same mob and the plea of the learned counsel that they relate to the same occurrence, cannot be accepted. In my considered view, no case is made out for quashing the FIR in Pakur (M) P.S. Case No. 144 of 2011.

There is no merit in this application and the same is accordingly, dismissed.