MUSA KARIM MOLLA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order dated 5.12.2010, passed by the learned ACJM, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas in G.R. Case No.5047 of 2015 arising out of Basirhat PS Case NO. 1157/15 dated 04.11.2015 under Sections 420/ 465/468/471/34 Penal Code discharging accused persons namely Rafiqul Islam and Nazrul Molla who were identifier and witness to the alleged forged deed being No.3923 of 2015 dated 09.04.2015 is the subject matter of challenge in this revisional application under Sec. 401 read with Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) On the basis of the complaint lodged by Musa Karim Molla/de facto complainant, police undertook investigation receiving an order from learned Magistrate under Sec. 156(3) Cr. P.C. Subsequently police submitted chargesheet conducting investigation in an erroneous manner leaving serious inconsistencies, discrepancies in the outcome of investigation with regard to the deed number and date of the alleged forged deed, said to have been forged. Though the investigating officer submitted chargesheet after arriving at a conclusion that the alleged deed in question was a forged one, but since insufficient materials were collected regarding execution and registration of the impugned deed, the court thought it prudent to pass an order dated 04.05.2017 of further investigation with a direction upon I.O. of Basirhat Police Station to conduct further investigations in the light of observation made by learned ACJM, Basirhat in the order dated 04.05.2017. In spite of the order requiring police to cause further investigation in terms of the directions, contained in the order dated 04.05.2017 by the learned ACJM, chargesheet was again submitted against three (3) accused persons namely 1) Motiyar Rahaman Mondal, 2) Anwara Begum 3) Ramjan Molla, who were alleged to have purchased the property upon execution of a forged deed in consequence of cheating by personation of the vendor of the property. The investigating officer though submitted chargesheet against three (3) accused persons, mentioned above, but at the same time proposed for discharge of two (2) accused persons namely, Rafiqul Islam and Nazrul Molla, who were identifier of the vendor and vendee of the alleged forged deed, and witness to the purported deed in question. The learned Magistrate simply discharged the accused persons, namely Rafiqul Islam and Nazrul Molla, as proposed by the IO for insufficient materials being collected against them.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that when the learned Magistrate by order dated 04.05.2017 directed reinvestigation asking the investigating officer to take up further investigation for unveiling the truth in a case, when apparently vendor of the alleged forged deed had already left the world long before the date of execution of registration of the deed, there somebody might have produced someone to facilitate doing cheating by personation of the deceased vendor before the registering authority in order to complete process of registration. The order requiring further investigation, if perfectly carried in a manner as contemplated in the order itself, there would have been a complete disclosure as to who are the persons involved in manufacturing this vexatious and forged deed, and thus order discharging the accused namely Rafiqul Islam and Nazrul Molla, who were the identifier of the vendor and witness to the deed in question respectively, was highly illegal requiring further investigation to unearth the truth behind the contention of the prosecution, as depicted in the FIR.