Rama Chandra Das vs Kailash Chandra Gochhayat and Others

S.C. Mohapatra, J.—Termination of a proceeding u/s 107, Criminal Procedure Code by application of Section 116(6), Cr.P.C. by the impugned appellate order is grievance of the petitioner in this revision.

Proceeding against opposite parties Nos. 1 to 22 u/s 107, Cr.P.C., was initiated at instance of petitioner on 15-10-1985. First witness was examined on 29-11-1986. Even accepting that 20-11-1986 shall be the date of commencement, enquiry is to be completed within six months i.e. by 20-5-1987. Before expiry of six months, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor raised the question of extension of time on basis of which learned Magistrate extended the period by further six months. Final order was passed on 31-8-1987. Opposite Parties preferred appeal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal on various grounds one of which is that no reason was given to extend the period of enquiry. This is grievance of petitioner.

Extension of the period of enquiry beyond six months is possible of provision u/s 116(6) Cr.P.C. is complied with. It reads as follows:--

(6). the inquiry under this section shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of its commencement, and if such inquiry is not so completed, the proceedings under this Chapter shall, on the expiry of the said period, stand terminated unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs:

Provided that where any person has been kept in detention pending such inquiry, the proceeding against that person, unless terminated earlier, shall stand terminated on the expiry of a period of six months of such detention.

On plain reading to this provision, it is clear that the proceeding would stand terminated on expiry of six months from the date of enquiry unless for special reasons to be recorded in writing the Magistrate otherwise directs. Raising question of extension of time by learned Assistant Public Prosecutor is not a special reason. Thus, extension of time by the learned Magistrate is contrary to law. Learned Sessions Judge rightly allowed the appeal directing the proceeding to stand terminated, I am not inclined to interfere with the order.

In result, there is no merit in this criminal revision which is dismissed.