CRR 1817 of 2019
Chandan Kumar Bera
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Mritunjoy Chatterjee,
Mr. S. Maity
… for the petitioner.
Ms. Sayanti Santra
… for the State.
I have gone through the record being CRR 1817 of 2019.
The petitioner, being the defacto complainant and the father of
the victim, has approached before this court by filing an
application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure challenging the impugned order being No.
4 dated 27.03.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions
Judge, First Court, Kakdwip, South 24 Parnagas, in connection
with Sessions Case No. 3 (1) of 2019. Learned Counsel appering
for the State has produced the case diary also. By the impugned
order the learned Judge rejected the prayer of the petitioner for
re-investigation of the case after considering the submissions
made by prosecution and the defence.
During the course of hearing, learned Counsel for the
petitioner submits that the investigation ended in the submission
of charge-sheet under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code only.
Learned Counsel invites the attention of the Court to different
annexures i.e., statements of the witnesses under Section 161
Cr. P.C. and submits that the materials collected by the
Investigating Officer during investigation in connection with the
commission of alleged offences under Section 498A of the Indian
Penal Code and also other provisions of the Indian Penal Code.
According to his contention, the Investigating Officer at the time
of filing charge-sheet only mentioned that an offence under
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code was committed which is not
On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the State submits
that the Investigating Officer has rightly submitted the charge-
sheet after considering the materials in the case diary.
From the submission and rival submission made by
learned Counsel for the parties, it appears that the petitioner
made prayer for reinvestigation before the learned Trial Court but
failed to justify why further investigation was required to be
conducted by the Investigating Officer.
I have gone through the impugned order. I do not find any
infirmity in the impugned order. From the submission advanced
by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the
petitioner has prayed for further investigation only for adding
some sections on the basis of materials already collected by the
Investigating Officer. In that case, there is no necessity of further
investigation by the Investigating Officer. However, Learned Trial
Judge is requested to consider the materials collected by the
Investigating Officer during investigation at the time of
consideration of charge.
In view of the above, I do not find any reason to interfere
with the impugned order. Hence the same is rejected on due
Accordingly, CRR 1817 of 2019 is disposed of.
Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be
supplied to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.
( Madhumati Mitra, J. )