Tithi Polley vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J

The grievance of the present petitioner is that, on an allegation of perpetrating an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code upon her, a complaint was lodged under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code, against the private respondent nos. 6 and 7 for harbouring the offenders, the police have not taken sufficient action against them.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that such offence is cognizable and a First Information Report ought to have been registered by the police on the same.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-authorities submits that already the police have taken statements under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from both respondent nos. 6 and 7 and have arrested one Rohit Kumar Paswan, who was one of the co-accused.

It is further submitted on the strength of the report filed in Court today, that the police, upon investigation, have learnt that the respondent no. 6, who is a lady aged about 60 years, being the mother of the accused, had no role to play in intimidating the witnesses of the petitioner, which was the subsequent complaint lodged by the petitioner. It also appears from the said report that the private respondent no. 7, who is in his mid-60s, is a reputed businessman in the area and it has been verified by the police upon enquiry that no intimidation was undertaken by the respondent no. 7 either.

As such, the police cannot be hauled up for not registering a First Information Report in terms of the complaint lodged by the petitioner under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code, in view of the police having already taken care of such complaint by undertaking appropriate enquiry in the matter.

Learned counsel for the respondent-authorities also files copies of the statements taken under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code from the respondent nos. 6 and 7 in Court today in a closed envelope, which is opened in court pursuant to my direction. Upon perusing such statement, it prima facie appears that the initial grievance of the petitioner, that no such statement was being taken in respect of the respondent nos. 6 and 7, has been addressed property.

It is also submitted on behalf of the police-authorities that a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has already been taken from the victim and investigation is on way for arresting the accused.

In such view of the matter, it does not seen that any further monitoring of the matter is necessary, since no such case remains after the report and the statements under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being filed in Court, which may be kept on record.

However, these observations will not prevent the petitioner from moving the court in future, in the event there is some concrete allegation as to the police not doing sufficiently its work in concluding the investigation in that regard.

Yet, no further direction need be passed on the police authorities at the present juncture in view of the circumstances as narrated above.

W.P. No. 23068 (W) of 2019 is disposed of in the light of the aforesaid observations.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copies of the order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.