GAFUR MIAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only prayer of the petitioner is that the investigating agency under the police department of the Government of Jharkhand has not completed the investigation in F.I.R. No. 006/2008 dated 30.01.2008 registered in Tisri (Sadar) Police Station of District Giridih in the matter of offence under Sec. 328, 304 B/34 Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.3 Superintendent of Police, Giridih on 10.12.2010. In the counter affidavit dated 10.12.2010 it has been stated that "the SDPO, Giridih was of the opinion that the case appears to be suspect. The SDPO directed the Investigating Officer to investigate the case on certain points and to send the viscera to FSL, Ranchi". The said communication is dated 17.04.2008. Then it has been stated that answering respondent, obviously the Superintendent of Police, vide letter No. 1262/CR dated 19.06.2009 directed the Investigating Officer of the case to record the statements of independent witnesses and toobtain viscera report from FSL, Ranchi. Then in para 14, it has been stated that statement of independent witnesses, whose names have been mentioned in the same para, have been recorded under Sec. 161 Code Criminal Procedure and it was stated by these witnesses that deceased died after eating "Prasad" brought by her cousin brother Khuti Mian. The facts stated in counter affidavit filed on 10.12.2010 clearly indicate that in the matter of allegation of commission of offence punishable under Sec. 328, 304 B/34 Indian Penal Code, even after it came to the notice of the highest authority of the district in police department, i.e. Superintendent of Police, the Superintendent of Police had to issue direction to the Investigating Officer to investigate on certain points and to send viscera to FSL and, thereafter, in the year 2009, after more than one year, he has to give further instruction to record the statements of independent witnesses, therefore, it appears that the investigation did not proceed and so happened even after the knowledge of the Superintendent of Police and further in a matter where the writ petition was already filed in the High Court.

(3.) In view of the above reasons, the writ petition of the petitioner is disposed of with direction to the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi to look into the matter and see that wherever any F.I.R. is registered in a police station, the investigation must be completed within given time frame and in case investigation is not being proceededby the concerned Investigating Officer, stern action be taken against the guilty persons as well as, if needed, against the supervisory authority also so that the court may not be burdened with unnecessary criminal petitions as well as writ petitions for such relief of expeditious investigation. Not only this, in this case, even after more than three years from registering the F.I.R., neither Final Report was submitted nor challan was filed. This Court may take serious view in the matter as the Court is aware that more older matters are pending investigation and challans/ Final Reports have not been filed in the courts resulting into burdening the trial courts.