Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 669 (GAU)

Raj Khatun v. States of Tripura

2010-08-31

BIPLAB KUMAR SHARMA

body2010
JUDGMENT B.K. Sharma, J. 1. The only grievance raised in this writ petition is non-registration of a police case pursuant to FIR lodged with the Officer-in-charge, Jatrapur Police Station on 27.1.2010. When no case was registered, the Petitioners furnished information to the Superintendent of Police, West District, Agartala vide Annexure-B to the writ petition, dated 29.1.2010. Thereafter also, no action having been taken to register a police case, the Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition. 2. In the counter-affidavit, filed by the Respondent, the allegations made by the Petitioner have been denied. According to the Respondents, it is the Petitioners who were aggressive against the official Respondents. Consequently, a Police case being Jatrapur P.S. Case No. 3 of 2010 has been registered under Sections 148/149/353/332, IPC and at present, the investigation is on. 3. Mr. K. Roy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners relying on a decision of the Apex Court in Lallan Chaudhary and Ors., v. State of Bihar and Anr., AIR 2006 SCW 5172 submits that the police officer is duty bound to register a case on receiving the information of cognizable offence and the reliability of the information is not a condition precedent for registration. 4. On the other hand, Mr. A. Ghosh, learned State counsel submits that since a police case has already been registered in respect of the said incident, there is no need to register another police case pertaining to the same incident. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and I have gone through the entire materials on record. As submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, only grievance of the Petitioner is that pursuant to the aforementioned FIR, the police ought to have registered a case and carry out necessary investigation. He further submits so far as the registered police case is concerned, the same is on the basis of information of the Respondents and not on the basis of the information given by the Petitioners. 6. Since the Petitioners have lodged an FIR on 27.1.2010 followed by further intimation furnished to the S.P. West Tripura on 29.1.2010, as per the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, irrespective of reliability or other wise of the information furnished, it was incumbent on the part of the police to register a case and investigate the matter, may be along with the other police case. 7. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of providing that the police may register a case on the basis of the aforementioned FIR made on 27.1.2010 and carry out the investigation, may be collectively, along with the said police case which has already been registered. 8. At this stage, Mr. A. Ghosh, learned State counsel submits that along with the said Jatrapur P.S. Case No. 3 of 2010, the FIR of the Petitioners has been tagged and matter is being investigated, in the process of which, the statements of some the Petitioners have also been recorded. 9. Be that as it may, the said process may continue with the registration of a police case on the basis of the said FIR dated 27.1.2010. 10. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.