HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
M.Cr.C. No. 12235/09
Shyama Bai Sonkar
The State of Madhya Pradesh and another
Criminal Revision No. 76/10
Govind and others
The State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Criminal Revision No. 1373/10
The State of Madhya Pradesh
M.Cr.C. No. 8909/10
The State of Madhya Pradesh and another
PRESENT: HON'BLE SHRI M.A. SIDDIQUI, J. -2-
Shri A.Usmani, Advocate for petitioners.
Shri Akshay Namdeo, Panel Lawyer for respondent /State. ORDER RESERVED ON 03.08.2012
ORDER PASSED ON 14.08.2012
Since all the above petitions relate to same crime numbers and relief claimed is similar, hence, they are being decided by this common order.
2. M.Cr.C. No. 12235/09 has been filed by petitioner Shyama Bai Sonkar and M.Cr.C.No. 8909/10 has been preferred by petitioner Jagdish Sonkar under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., whereas other petitioners have filed criminal revisions under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. Except petitioner Shyama Bai Sonkar, the other petitioners herein are the accused persons in Crime No. 504/04 and 505/04 registered by Police Station-Hanumantal, Jabalpur.
3. The relevant facts are that local police party of Jabalpur in the brand name of Central Squad on 5.9.04 in the earlier part of the morning raided the house of brother of accused/petitioner Babu Sonkar in the garb of raiding of gambling in his house, and in the process of raid 19 gamblers were taken into custody and Rs.48,000/- were seized. This raid was resisted and revolver of one of the police officer was snatched and seized Rs.48,000/- were also snatched and a fight took place in which some personnel of police party sustained injuries and the accused persons also sustained injuries. Petitioner Jagdish Sonkar was seriously injured. Injured persons were referred to the hospital and they were treated. Skull bone of petitioner Jagdish -3-
Sonkar was broken and could not be affixed and his general condition is still not well and he is on death to bed. Other accused persons including Babu Sonkar, Dharmendra Sonkar, Sanju Sonkar as well as the injured police personnel were treated. Accused persons were arrested and PS- Hanumantal registered Crime No.504/04 under Sections 147,148,149,307,395,353,186, 224 of IPC read with Section 25/27 of Arms Act against the accused/petitioners except petitioner Shyama Bai Sonkar, and Crime No. 505/04 was registered under Sections 3 and 4 of the Gambling Act. After usual investigation, challan was filed and ST No.72/05 was registered for Crime No.504/04 and Criminal Case No.1509/04 of Gambling was registered in the Court of JMFC, Jabalpur.
4. Petitioner Shyama Bai filed several writ petitions with the request not only to quash the proceedings against the accused/petitioners, but also for an order to conduct the investigation/inquiry under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. , and this Court, though disallowed the prayer of Investigation by CBI, but ordered the inquiry to be conducted by CID and one DIG conducted the inquiry and gave his report. Order dated 25.1.05, 30.9.05 and 11.8.09 were passed in WP Nos. 406/05, 6519/05 and in WP No. 4093/07 respectively.
5. Before the Judl.Magistrate Ist Class and 3rd Addl.Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, accused persons again requested to conduct an inquiry by CBI and further investigation under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. and to quash the proceedings against the accused persons -4-
alleging that they have been falsely implicated by the police in this case. Judl. Magistrate Ist Class and 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur rejected the request of inquiry under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. as police had already conducted an inquiry and filed different challans in the competent Courts , it was also found that the trial was at the last stage, and only on the ground that petitioner Jagdish Sonkar was seriously injured, due to his critical health, he cannot be discharged. Against the aforesaid orders , these different petitions have been filed.
6. Shri A.Usmani, learned counsel appearing for petitioners has vehemently argued that inquiry may be ordered to be conducted by this Court. He has placed reliance on a decision of Apex Court in State of Punjab vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Others 2011 Cri.L.J.4928 (SC) in which it has been held that under Section 173(8) and under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. fresh investigation or re- investigation after filing of challan or charge sheet by police can be ordered by the High Court under Section 482 to secure ends of justice and inherent powers of High Court are not limited or affected by Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C.
7. Shri Akshay Namdeo, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State submitted that though this Court has got all powers to secure ends of justice, but it should be done in exceptional cases as the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be invoked only in appropriate and rarest of rare cases. He submitted that police party was raiding the gambling and Rs.48,000/- were seized and gamblers were taken into custody, but accused/petitioners took the law in their -5-
hands and forcibly snatched the revolver of police officer as well as the seized money, and gamblers were also taken away from the custody and police personnel were assaulted who also got serious injuries, and if, in order to resist the assault, some force was used by the police, then it cannot be said that police has crossed the limits.
8. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners has taken me through the various orders passed in writ petitions in which after considering the request, investigation by CBI was refused and inquiry by CID has been ordered and one DIG of CID conducted the enquiry and gave the report. Counsel submitted that DIG has found that action of police was suspicious and role of accused persons is also suspicious.
9. As far as the report of DIG of CID is concerned, as that report has to be considered by the learned trial Court, so no detailed scrutiny can be done by this Court as it will affect the merits of the case. Hence, looking to the circumstances of the case, no scrutiny of report of DIG can be done by this Court and it has to be considered by learned trial Court.
10. It is pertinent to note that in writ petitions, accused/petitioners were suggested that if they so desire, they may initiate proceeding of private complaint under Section 200, etc. of Cr.P.C. as police was not willing to cooperate, but no such initiation was taken and no private complaint was filed against the alleged atrocities by the police, and again and again coming forward for re-investigation under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. is the action just like beating the bushes and not to take appropriate action. Had the accused/petitioners were annoyed -6-
with the act of police as they have stated that atrocity was done to them and so many persons were brutally assaulted and received injuries including petitioner Jagdish Sonkar, they could have certainly brought the private complaint against the delinquent police officials, but no initiation has been taken in this regard and when through writ the re-investigation by CBI was refused, then such a repeated prayer cannot be accepted. By filing various writ petitions and proceedings for re-investigation, it appears that the aim of petitioners is to get rid of the prosecution which has been lodged by the police which cannot be legally done by the Court and it has already been considered in various writs by this Court. Accused/petitioners are being tried by the Courts and trials are almost at the final stage. As far as discharge of petitioner Jagdish Sonkar is concerned, he cannot be discharged on the ground of his critical health. There are serious allegations against him also for which he is being tried. So far as incapability of his defence is concerned, it may be raised before the trial Court.
11. Looking to the aforesaid circumstances, in my opinion, no interference is called for in these petitions. The petitions being devoid of merits are hereby dismissed.