Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 390 (PAT)

Raju Sah v. State Of Bihar

2006-04-28

L.P.SINGH

body2006
Judgment 1. Heard the parties. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report of Akbarnagar RS. Case No. 7 of 2005, contained in Annexure-2, which has been wrongly instituted against the petitioner and others where as for the same incident the police had already registered Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 one day prior to the instant case and also for a direction to merge Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7/2005 into Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 as also to declare Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7 of 2005 as illegal, arbitrary and in violative of Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the Code). 3. The facts leading to the case are that one Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 was instituted on 6.12.2005 under sections 418 and 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code against Sanjay Kumar Sah and another on the basis of the statement of one Ashok Kumar Nidhi, Assistant Manager of State Food Corporation, Bhagalpur. The informant had submitted a written report alleging therein that he is posted in State Food Corporation at Amarpur as a Sr. Assistant Manager Transporter agent of Food Corporation namely, Bibhishan Kumar reported him that the driver of Truck No. W.B. 03-0432 loaded with rice of 200 bags had proceeded for Amarpur Godown. He further disclosed that driver of the truck took food at Simariya Hotel thereafter he proceeded again towards Amarpur then Sanjay Kumar Sah and Jitendra Kumar Bhagat, Ex-transporter agent asked the driver to go towards Akbarnagar via Sahkund but the driver said that he has to go to Amarpur, Bhagat told the driver that he is also a transport agent so proceed towards Akbarnagar via Sahkund and he has already talked with the owner of the truck. The driver of the truck believed on their version and proceeded with truck towards Akbarnagar via Kajraili Chowk. 4. On 7.12.2005 the informant/Narendra Kumar has reported the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur stating therein that on 6.12.2005 he alongwith other police personnel proceeded from the police station for patrolling and he got a confidential information that rice of Food Corporation loaded on a truck has been brought and being unloaded near railway Gumti at Village Hario. 4. On 7.12.2005 the informant/Narendra Kumar has reported the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur stating therein that on 6.12.2005 he alongwith other police personnel proceeded from the police station for patrolling and he got a confidential information that rice of Food Corporation loaded on a truck has been brought and being unloaded near railway Gumti at Village Hario. The informant proceeded from village Khiraiya and while he reached near Railway Gumti he saw a truck No. W.B. 030432 standing near the Gumti where few persons were standing and others were unloading. The informant ordered to stay there and reached, thereafter three persons standing near the truck proceeded toward southern side, out of that two persons were apprehended by him and one succeeded to flee away. They disclosed their names as Chandan Kumar and Pramod Yadav. While the informant asked the name of persons unloading the bags, they disclosed their name as Niranjan Kumar Mandal Akhilesh Mandal and Mukesh Paswan who were labourers. They also disclosed the name of the driver Binod Paswan who escaped from there. Apprehended persons disclosed that they are employees of transporter of State Food Corporation namely, Bibhishan Kumar and on the direction of him the rice bags are being unloaded in the godown of Raju Sah. Accordingly the bags of rice were seized by the informant. The accused persons did not produce any paper of ownership of rice which appears to be of Food Corporation. A seizure list prepared in presence of the witnesses. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted once the informant of Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7/2005 chosen to submit written report to the Chief Judicial Magistrate then that information should have been treated as complaint filed under section 200 of the Code and examination of complainant in terms of Section 200 of the Code was essential. But in this case the informant has neither been examined on solemn affirmation nor the court below has passed any order to register a case. It has been further submitted that while the informant had got wireless message about the registration of Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005, that a truck loaded with bags of rice was seized and instead of referring the matter to Kajraili police station he himself registered the case with ulterior motive while the Chief Judicial Magistrate did not order for registration of another case. It has been further submitted that the police had already registered Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 on 6.12.2005 itself and that information was already circulated to all concerned police station so that the truck in question may be located or recovered but the informant Narendra Kumar of Akbarnagar Police Station knowingly and wrongly registered another case with a view to exploit the innocent persons who are not even involved in the case but have been made accused at the instance of ex-transporter. It has been further submitted that it is settled principle of law that no second F.I.R. should be instituted relating to one offence unless the court orders. It has been further submitted that Chapter XII of the Code casts power of investigation to the police and their powers to investigate the case. Section 154 of the Code provides information given to the police on cognizable dases. It is well settled that the first information given to the police of an offence gives the police power to investigate a case. Once an F.I.R. relating to an incident is lodged, no second, or subsequent information relating to same incident is permissible to be registered as F.I.R. under the law. 6. It is an established principle of law that F.I.R. is an information in the police about commissioning of cognizable offence for starting investigation to get an offender punished. It is an information for starting the investigation. There should not be more than one F.I.R. that too in different police station for the same alleged offence. In this case it is alleged that bags of the food grains of Food Corporation of India was loaded on a truck from Bhagalpur for transporting it to Amarpur godown on a truck no. W.B.03-0432 which was taken in wrong direction for which Sr. Assistant Manager got an F.I.R. lodged at Kajraili police station on 6.12.2005. However, the Officer Incharge of Akbarnagar again on the next day i.e. on 7.12.2005 registered another F.I.R. and information was also forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. As earlier F.I.R. was registered at Kajraili police station, the second F.I.R. should not have been registered and the information given in the second report could have been used by Kajraili police station for making investigating the case. In this case two F.I.R. have been registered which is against law. 7. As earlier F.I.R. was registered at Kajraili police station, the second F.I.R. should not have been registered and the information given in the second report could have been used by Kajraili police station for making investigating the case. In this case two F.I.R. have been registered which is against law. 7. Considering the fact, second F.I.R. registered as Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7 of 2005 is not be legally considered as F.I.R. and information so recorded shall be forwarded to Kajraili police station which will be treated as information collected during investigation. 8. With the aforesaid observation this application is disposed of.