- (1.) Invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the First Information Report, where he has been charged under Sections 354/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) Mr. Nirmal Kumar Manna, the Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused/petitioner has urged the following points in support of the prayer for quashing; (a) The FIR does not contain the basic ingredients of the offences alleged. (b) Although no report in final form has been filed till date and having regards to the facts the entire proceeding is absolutely harassive in nature, still the Learned Magistrate has not dropped the case against the petitioner. (c) The impugned proceeding is a counter-blast to the case earlier lodged by the present petitioner. (d) The allegations are absolutely false. (e) Although, according to the formal portion of the FIR, the information was received at the police station at 14.05 hours on 24th of May, 2006, but it appears from the FIR and from the endorsement made on the complaint that the same was received at the Camp Office at 18.35 hours on 24th of May, 2006. Thus, before receiving the complaint at the Camp Office such complaint cannot be received at the police station. (f) In this case a Sub-Inspector of Police not the Officer-in-Charge of that particular police station directed registration of the case and for causing investigation which is absolutely illegal and without jurisdiction. On the other hand, the Learned Junior Government Advocate, Mrs. Krishna Ghosh vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing. At the very outset she pointed out earlier on the selfsame grounds the petitioners moved another criminal revision being C.R.R. No. 1106 of 2007 for quashing of the impugned First Information Report. However, this Honble High Court by an order made on September 17, 2008 dismissed the said criminal revision.
(3.) I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the parties.;