Bhagwan Lal Soni And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Petitioner Bhagwan Lal Soni has preferred the Misc. Petition No.4109/2014 aggrieved by order dated 12.03.2014 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan, whereby Court has taken cognizance against the petitioner and against order dated 04.07.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No.3 Jaipur Metropolitian, whereby the revisional Court has partly allowed the revision and directed the court below to hear the petitioner on question of protection available under section 197 Cr.P.C.

Complainant-Chhatradhar has preferred Criminal Misc. Petition No.4983/2014 aggrieved by order dated 04.07.2014 vide which the revisional Court remanded the case back to the trial Court in revision petition filed by Bhagwan Lal Soni.

Complainant Chhatradhar Sharma has preferred the Misc. Petition No.4982/2014 challenging therein the order dated 21.04.2014 passed by the revisional Court, whereby the revisional Court has quashed and set aside the order dated 12.03.2014 passed by the trial Court vide which cognizance was taken against Dr. Prabha Sharma and has remanded the case back to the learned Court below with the directions to pass orders afresh with regard to revisionist Dr. Prabha Sharma after considering the material on record.

As all these misc. petitions pertain to F.I.R. No.381/2012, all the misc. petitions are decided by this common order.

In brief, the factual matrix of the case are that F.I.R. bearing No.369/2010 was registered at Police Station, Chaksu against five accused-persons. Police got the document examined by Dr. Vinod Choudhary. Thereafter, some allegations were levelled against Dr. Vinod Choudhary, and on account of letter written by Department of Home to Director FSL dated 10.01.2012, Director FSL constituted a Board of three Doctors which has submitted the report that the document is genuine & is signed by complainant. On account of this report, negative final report was submitted.

The matter was taken to the High Court by the complainant. There being two reports, the matter was sent to CFSL. CFSL also gave report that the alleged document "power of attorney" bears signature of the complainant-Chhatradhar Sharma. A negative final report was thus submitted. On submission of negative final report, complainant filed complaint against twenty persons. Court took cognizance against five Police Officers, Director FSL and the private person "Kewal Ram".

It is contended by counsel for Bhagwan Lal Soni that Bhagwan Lal Soni is not named in the complaint and since he was Police Commissioner and as there were two reports, one by Vinod Choudhary and other by Board which were contradictory and a misc. petition was also preferred before the High Court for transfer of the case to CBI, which was later withdrawn by the petitioner, Bhagwan Lal Soni, Police Commissioner sought it fit to take report from CFSL. He was empowered to take report from Central Forensic Laboratory as there were varying reports. There was no justification in taking cognizance against Senior Police Officer who was acting in accordance with the powers which were vested in him.

It is contended by counsel for the complainant that the Revisional Court was not justified in quashing the cognizance order passed against Dr. Prabha Sharma and directing the Court below to decide the matter afresh. It is also contended that the revisional Court has erred in remanding the case back to the Court below for deciding it afresh and reconsidering the question of applicability of Section 197 Cr.P.C. with regard to taking cognizance against Bhagwan Lal Soni as the Court below had already considered the material with regard to Section 197 Cr.P.C.

It is also contended by counsel for the complainant that page No.2 of power of attorney was changed by the accused and instead of one property, the entire property was mentioned in that page, which proves that the signature on that page was forged.

I have considered the contentions.

I deem it proper to first deal with Criminal Misc. Petition NO.4109/2014 preferred by Bhagwan Lal Soni, the then Commissioner of Police, Jaipur and Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4983/2014 filed by the complaint. It is evident from perusal of the complaint that the complainant did not implead Bhagwan Lal Soni as an accused in his complaint and in his statement recorded before the Court, he did not mention the name of petitioner- Bhagwan Lal Soni. From perusal of the record, it is revealed that there was a report submitted by Vimal Choudhary, as per which, the disputed document stamped and marked 'Q-3' was a built up document, subsequently made. On receipt of letter from Home Department, Dr. Prabha Sharma, Director State Forensic Laboratory constituted a Board. The report of which was against the complainant, it was opined that the document power of attorney was signed by the complainant.

There being divergent view, the then Additional Commissioner vide letter dated 3.08.2012 requested Bhagwan Lal Soni the then Commissioner of Police to send the matter to CFSL. Bhagwan Lal Soni in accordance with the request made by Additional Commissioner referred the matter to CFSL. Bhagwan Lal Soni was neither investigating the case nor was the case referred to him. There is no evidence that he connived with the Investigating Officer to help the accused.

In "Krishnan & Anr. vs Krishnaveni & Anr." AIR 1997 SC 987, the Apex Court has held that though revision before the High Court under sub-section (1) of Section 397 is prohibited by sub- section (3) thereof, inherent power of the High Court is still available under Section 482 of the Code and as it is paramount power of continuous superintendence of the High Court under Section 483, the High Court is justified in interfering with the orders leading to miscarriage of justice and in setting aside such orders.

Since the High Court exercises the powers of superintendence and the impugned order is challenged by the complainant himself, this Court deems it proper to invoke the inherent powers as this is a case where the Police Commissioner who was not arrayed as an accused in the complaint and against whom no evidence was adduced by the complainant and who has exercised his supervisory powers by accepting the request of Additional Commissioner of Police for sending the matter to CFSL. Continuing the proceedings against the Police Commissioner in such a case is abuse of the process of the Court, hence the order passed by the Magistrate vide which he has taken cognizance against Bhagwan Lal Soni, Commissioner of Police and the impugned order passed by Additional Session Judge No.3, Jaipur, Metropolitan deserves to be quashed and set aside.

In Misc. Petition No. 4982/2014 aggrieved by order dated 21.04.2014, it is argued by counsel for the complainant that there was a report of Vimal Choudhary with regard to the disputed power of attorney and Dr. Prabha Sharma on her own constituted a Board. It is argued that the Revisional Court has erred in setting aside the order of cognizance passed against Dr. Prabha Sharma.

In the complaint, complainant has mentioned that Dr. Prabha Sharma the then Director State Forensic Laboratory, without there being any order by the Government constituted a Board, but the Revisional Court came to the conclusion that there was a letter issued by the Home Department dated 10.01.2012 addressed to the Director of FSL to investigate and submit the inquiry report and in view of that letter vide order dated 12.01.2012, Dr. Prabha Sharma constituted a Board of three Officers who all were of the rank of Deputy Director of Rajasthan Forensic Science Laboratory.

It is further pertinent to note that the Officer who had given the first report, himself is under scanner and is facing Departmental Inquiry for submitting fake reports. Therefore, the action taken by Dr. Prabha Sharma cannot be said to be in connivance with the accused or Investigating Officer.

The Revisional Court after detailed deliberations came to the conclusion that Dr. Prabha Sharma was not in collusion with other co-accused when she constituted the Board for re-examination of the document as there was a government order dated 08.08.2003 that, if in case, documents are referred for re-examination, it would be appropriate that such examination be exercised by the Expert of the concerned specialty. The Revisional Court has further come to the conclusion that Dr. Prabha Sharma constituted the Board after receipt of letter from the Home Department, requesting her to constitute the Board. The Revisional Court has also observed that the disciplinary proceedings against the revisionist has already been dropped vide Government order dated 06.05.2013.

This Court is of the firm view that Dr. Prabha Sharma acted in furtherance of the letter received from the Home Department and she acted as per the government orders, the departmental inquiry against her has also been dropped. The Revisional Court has not committed any error in quashing the order of cognizance, however, having come to the conclusion that the Board was constituted after receipt of letter from the Home Department, the Revisional Court erred in remanding the case back to the trial Court to pass orders afresh.

As a result, Criminal Misc. Petition No.4109/2014 preferred by Bhagwal Lal Soni is allowed and Criminal Misc. Petitions No.4983/2014 and 4982/2014 preferred by Chhatradhar Sharma are dismissed. Impugned orders, to the extent Court has remanded back the case is also quashed and set aside. Proceedings pending against Bhagwan Lal Soni and Dr.Prabha Sharma are set aside. Stay applications also stand disposed of.

Copy of this order be placed in connected files.