Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 4 (PAT)

Masih Uddin v. State Of Bihar

2009-01-06

S.P.SINGH

body2009
JUDGEMENT 1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for constituting an enquiry into the issuance of letter dated 3.2.2007 vide memo no. 561 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Nawadah and letter dated 20.3.2007 vide memo No. 1270 issued by the Dy. Superintendent of Police (Head quarter), Nawadah whereby baseless non-existent allegations/charges have been made against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an Advocate and is a social activist and highlighting the atrocities perpetuated on the weaker section of the society. He submits that respondent No.9 by the impugned letter dated 20.3.2007 has referred to nine cases against his record. He further asserts that the petitioner has been discharged in Narhat P.S. Case No.40/88 dated 27.6.1988, Narhat P.S. Case No.41/88 dated 28.8.88 and Narhat P.S. Case No. 65/89 dated 8.11.89. He submits that the police after investigation has submitted final form in his favour in Narhat P.S. Case No. 101/2001 dated 16.12.2001 and Narhat P.S. Case No. 73/2003 dated 26.9.2003. He further submits that the cases mentioned at SI. Nos. 3, 7 and 8 i.e. in Narhat P.S. Case No. 63/87, Memo No. 1921 dated 11.10.87 and Narhat P.S. Case No.1/87 respectively there is factually no evidence against him. He, however, submits that the case mentioned at SI. No.9 i.e Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 123/2006 dated 11.11.2006 is pending investigation. 3. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid letter prejudice the petitioner as the same may be utilized against him in view of Rule 357 (b) read with Rule 366-A of the Bihar Police Manual. 4. It would be useful to reproduce Rule 357 (b) and Rule 366-A of the Bihar Police Manual herein under: "Rule 357 (b): When entries are to be made in the Directory.Only true cases are to find entry in the directory. Therefore, entries should begin as soon as F.F. is submitted. Entries in other columns are to be made on receipt of F.M. Rule 366A. How and when crime directory shall be referred.(a) In a case registered against unknown person in any of the heads mentioned in Appendix 17, the Station Incharge or Investigating Officer shall see the M.O. index of Crime Directory Part II for names of such persons who are likely to have committed this crime. It is also necessary to study the connected entries of Crime Directory Part III. It is also necessary to study the connected entries of Crime Directory Part III. This reference shall be useful only when the spread of crime is studied after seeing crime map. All the apropriate M.O. symbols which are noted against the names entered in M.O. index to Crime Directory Part II should be deciphered". 5. Rule 357 (b) provides that only true cases are to find entry in the directory to be maintained under the Police Manual. Rule 366-A provides a guidelines as to how and when crime directory can be referred to. 5A. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State wherein in paragraph 19 it has been stated that Narhat P.S. Case No. 40 of 1988, Narhat P.S. Case No. 41/88 and Narhat P.S. Case No. 65 of 1989 were found prima facie true during the police investigation and charge sheet was submitted in all the above three cases. It has been further stated in paragraph 20 that the version of the petitioner that he is neither suspect nor an accused in Narhat P.S, Case No. 63 of 1987 under Section 397 of the Penal Code is not factually correct. 6. This Court finds that the police in quite some cases have not sent up the petitioner for trial. This in itself shows that the police is acting fairly. The main grievance of the petitioner is that tha police should not refer to the cases in which accusations against the petitioner have not been found true while making official correspondence. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court does not find that the police acted with any malice while issuing the impugned letters. However, they should have their records up to date and no reference should be made pointing accusations in cases in which petitioner has either been discharged or in which final form in his favour has been submitted by the police as the same may cause prejudice to the petitioner in terms of Rule 357(b) read with Rule 366-A of the Bihar Police Manual. 8. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.