Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 385 (GAU)

Likha Maj v. State of Arunachal Pradesh

2009-06-04

BROJENDRA PRASAD KATAKEY, J.CHELAMESWAR, RANJAN GOGOI

body2009
JUDGMENT Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. This miscellaneous case his been filed by one of the accused in Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005 seeking the following reliefs: (i) The investigating team be directed to file charge-sheet(s) in the Trial Court with a specific time frame, by modifying and removing the embargo imposed vide it's order dated 21.12.2006. (ii) To file charge-sheets in the cases in which investigation has been concluded. (iii) To complete and conclude the investigation in remaining cases, if any, within specified time frame. (iv) To close the PIL in consequence to above allowing the criminal Court to take it's own recourse in criminal justice administration. (v) To pass other order as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper. 2. To essence of the claim made in the misc. case is that by order dated 21.12.2006 passed in PIL No. 50/2004 this Court had put a restraint on the closure of investigation and filing of charge-sheet, inter alia, in Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005. As a result of the said order, according to the applicant, the investigation of the said case had lingered on and charge-sheet has not been filed resulting in denial of the right of fair trial to the applicant. 3. We have noticed that notwithstanding the order dated 21.12.2006 passed by the Division Bench earlier hearing PIL No. 50/2004 charge-sheet, in part, has been submitted in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005. The said action has been approved by the Court and further investigation has been ordered and is being monitored. The applicant in the misc. case is one of the accused in the aforesaid case i.e. Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005. 4. The investigation in the aforesaid case i.e. Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005 is a multifaceted investigation into several area of irregularities that had occurred in the public distribution system in the entire State of Arunachal Pradesh for a period of over four years. Time and again, this Court has emphasized that the very magnitude of the investigation requires streamlining after clear identification of the ares of investigation for which purpose a Special Investigation Team has been constituted by the Court with the direction to submit interim reports of investigation carried out. Time and again, this Court has emphasized that the very magnitude of the investigation requires streamlining after clear identification of the ares of investigation for which purpose a Special Investigation Team has been constituted by the Court with the direction to submit interim reports of investigation carried out. As and when investigation of any part of the multifaceted inquiry is over, charge-sheet has been submitted in part which action has also been approved by this Court. As on date, charge-sheet has been submitted against as many as 10 accused in Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005 whereas investigation in respect of the precise involvement of the other accused is still going on. In such circumstances, having regard to the sheer magnitude of the investigation that is required to be undertaken we do not deem it appropriate to pass any order or direction as prayed for by the applicant in the misc. case. In fact, any such order of the Court would have the effect of aborting the investigative process undertaken so far. We, therefore, refrain from conceding to any of the prayers made in the misc. case save and except that as and when distinct phases of the investigation of Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 8/2005 is over the investigation team will be at liberty to submit part charge-sheets before the Court competent for the time being i.e. till the issue with regard to transfer of the trial of the cases is decided by this Court. 5. The misc. case is accordingly dismissed subject to the observations above.