D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing the order dated 25.4.2005 whereby learned court below has allowed the prayer of the Investigating Officer for reinvestigation of the case against the petitioners vide Bagodar P. S. Case No. 315 of 2004, corresponding to G.R. No. 2301 of 2004.
(2.) FACTS of the case stated briefly is that on the basis of confidential information that substantial quantities of coal collected by way of illegal mining from the government colliery was being transported to another State, the police intercepted two trucks loaded with coal and arrested some persons including the drivers of the vehicles. A case for the offences under Sections 413, 414, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 33 of the Indian Forest Act was registered at the police station. Later, on concluding the investigation the Investigating Officer submitted final form in favour of the accused including the petitioner who is the owner of one of the seized trucks. The final form was accepted by the court below. After lapse of considerable period, an application was filed by the police before the court below seeking permission to re -investigate the case on the directions of the superior police officer. By the order impugned, the learned court below granted permission to re -investigate. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that in the aforesaid case, after concluding the investigation, the Investigating Officer had submitted final report in favour of the petitioners with a. declaration that F.I.R. was based on mistake of fact and the same was accepted by the learned court below. Yet, after almost two years, the same Investigating Officer had filed a petition before the court below seeking permission to reopen the case for reinvestigation purportedly on the basis of a direction issued to him by the Senior Police Official. Referring to the impugned order, learned Counsel submits that the same is bad in law inasmuch as though the provisions of Sec. 173 (8) Cr. P.C. do enable the Investigating Officer to conduct further investigation even after submission of final form, but the same can be done only on permission given by the concerned court and by showing reasonable grounds for reopening the investigation. In the instant case the impugned order, according to the learned Counsel, does not reflect any such ground or grounds for allowing the investigation of the case to be reopened.
(3.) ON querry, learned Counsel for the petitioners had failed to submit a copy of petition filed by the Investigating Officer before the court below seeking permission to reinvestigate the case. He has however produced a copy of a memo issued to the Investigating Officer by D.I.G. Police, Hazaribagh, which contains a direction of the Senior Police Officer to the Investigating Officer for seeking permission from the court below for reinvestigation.;