Ananda Saha vs The State of West Bengal and Others

Joymalya Bagchi, J.—This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that in the midnight of 5/6th June, 2011, the then Officer in-Charge of New Town Police Station, namely, Nandadulal Ghosh, had allegedly misused his powers and illegally arrested him at the behest of respondent nos. 10 and 11 herein. In that regard, the petitioner made a representation before the respondent no. 6, the Superintendent of Police, North 24-Parganas, requesting him to take appropriate steps in the matter and also to grant sanction for prosecution of the said officer.

It has been pleaded in the writ petition that over the aforesaid incident an enquiry was made at the behest of one Sukumar Chatterjee, Inspector in-Charge, Rajarhat Police Station and an enquiry report was filed. Information was sought for under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 with regard to facts and circumstances, which resulted in preparation of the said enquiry report and also with regard to the result of the complaint, lodged with respondent no. 6. Such information has been withheld purportedly in public interest in terms of memorandum no. 541-PAR (AR)/O/3M-29/2005 Pt, VillA, dated 29th August, 2006.

Accordingly, prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondent-police authorities to make proper investigation into the matter and dispose of the application u/s 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to supply copy of the enquiry report. Prayer has also been made for declaration that detention was illegal and for compensation.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the enquiry report was already in the public domain and has been annexed to the writ petition. It has also been submitted, as it would also appear from the said enquiry report, that the arrest of the petitioner was u/s 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in view of the fact that he made an attempt to assault the private respondents and obstruct the police personnel in discharge of statutory duty of maintaining law and order. Accordingly, it was submitted on instructions that a decision has been taken not to proceed in the matter against the police personnel. No case of prosecution of the police personnel or compensation, in public law or otherwise, has been made out.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 10 and 11 denies and disputes the allegations made in the writ petition and submits that the action of the police authorities was instituted and was necessary to prevent the petitioner from committing a cognizable offence.

I have considered the rival submissions of the parties. I find that the allegation of illegal arrest and detention of petitioner by the then Officer in-Charge, New Town Police Station is denied and disputed by the respondents. Enquiry report submitted by the police authorities supports the version of the respondents. Truthfulness or otherwise of such report cannot be gone into in this writ petition. However, the petitioner has every right to dispute such report by leading cogent evidence to the contrary in accordance with law before the Criminal Court.

Accordingly, the petitioner is given liberty to initiate appropriate criminal proceeding in accordance with law against the erring police personnel before the appropriate Criminal Court, if he so advised. However, bearing in mind the disputed factual versions relating to the arrest and detention of the petitioner, I am of the view that it would not be prudent to adjudicate such issue and come to a conclusive finding thereon in public law domain. This is not a case where the allegation of breach of fundamental right to life and liability is so patent and self evident that declaration thereto may be made in exercise of writ jurisdiction without relegating the parties to an elaborate enquiry under the ordinary law of the land.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

The respondents having not been called upon to file any affidavit, the allegations leveled against them shall not be deemed to be admitted.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied on priority basis.