Heard Shri Anupam Verma, applicant, who appears in person, Shri Rajeev Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. appearing for opposite party Nos.1 to 5 and perused the record.
This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for directing the Investigating Officer (Respondent No.4) to provide a complete certified copy of Final Report/Police Report No.44A of 2018, dated 02.01.2021 arising out of F.I.R. No.06 of 2018, Police Station Fursatganj, District Amethi in terms of the statutory mandate contained in Clause (ii) of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. as well as under Sub Section 15A(3), 15A (4), 15A(5) & 15A(11)(i) of Section 15A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It is submitted by Shri Anupam Verma, who appears in person, that he had lodged a first information report as Case Crime No.6/2015 against accused persons and after investigation of the same a Final Report was submitted by the investigating officer, however, on a protest petition filed by him, the ''Final Report' was not accepted and further investigation was directed with a direction to conclude the investigation within two weeks. It is further submitted that when the investigation of the case is not completed within the time stipulated, the applicant approached the High Court in contempt proceedings wherein it is informed by the State that the Final Report has again been filed. Thereafter the applicant moved an application before the trial court requesting to provide him the Police Report No.44A/2018 dated 02.01.2021, however, the same was not provided to him.
While referring to the Section 173 Cr.P.C. as well as Section 15A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ''the S.C./S.T. Act') it is vehemently submitted that it is the duty of the investigating officer to provide complete case diary to the applicant (informant) so that he could pursue the further course of action and when he will not be aware as to on what basis the Final Report has been submitted, it will not be possible for him to file a ''protest petition' and thus a direction be given to the authorities to provide him complete case diary on the basis of which the Final Report has been submitted.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that under Section 173, sub section 2(ii) it has been provided that the investigating officer shall communicate to the person by whom the information relating to the commission of offence was given pertaining to the action taken by him in such a manner as may be prescribed by the State Government and in compliance of this provision the information pertaining to the submission of the Final Report (Closure Report) has been provided to the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no provision for providing a copy of complete case diary to the informant or complainant and therefore, the same could not be given to the applicant unless and until any order in this respect has been passed by any court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record the grievance of the applicant appears to be that though after investigation and further investigation of the case the Closure Report (Final Report) has been filed by the investigating officer, however, when the Final Report has been filed after the order of the further investigation passed by the magistrate, a copy of complete case diary was not provided to him, so he could not file protest petition before the magistrate. It is requested by him that a copy of complete case diary be provided to him. Section 173(2)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides as under:
"(ii) The officer shall also communicate, in such manner as may be prescribed by the State Government, the action taken by him, to the person, if any, by whom the information relating to the commission of the offence was first given."
The above provision would reveal that a duty has been casted on the investigating officer to inform the informant about the fate of the first information report lodged by him.
The State in its affidavit while stating that the Final Report No.44A.2018 dated 02.01.2021 has been filed on the basis that no evidence has been found against the accused persons and a copy of the information regarding Final Report has been made available to the complainant Anupam Verma (applicant) on 07.01.2021 and receiving of the same by the applicant has been placed as Annexure No.3 to the affidavit.
Thus it is apparent from the above discussion that so far as the mandate of Section 173(2)(ii) is concerned, the same appears to have been complied by the investigating officer.
At this juncture the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to Section 15A (11)(i) of the S.C./S.T. Act and submits that having regard to this provision it is the duty of the investigating officer or State to provide copy of complete case diary to him.
Section 15A (11)(i) of the S.C./S.T. Act is reproduced as under:
"(11) It shall be the duty of the concerned State to specify an appropriate scheme to ensure implementation of the following rights and entitlements of victims and witnesses in accessing justice so as:-
"(i) to provide the information to atrocity victims or their dependents or associated organisations or individuals, on the status of investigation and charge sheet and to provide copy of the charge sheet at free of cost."
A perusal of sub section 11 of Section 15A of the S.C./S.T. Act would reveal that through this provision a duty has been casted on the State to specify an appropriate scheme to ensure implementation of certain rights with regard to the victims and witnesses of specified crimes under S.C./S.T. Act in order to help him to access justice and a list of these rights has been provided from sub section 11(a) to 11(n) of the S.C./S.T. Act. Nothing has been brought to the knowledge of this Court either by the applicant or by the State, which may show that any such scheme has been formulated by the State wherein it is provided that the informant of the case pertaining to the offence of the S.C./S.T. Act will be provided complete case diary by the State Government, however, various provisions have been made in the S.C./S.T. Act for the safeguarding of interest of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Thus, it is clear that in absence of any such provision no such direction of providing complete case diary to the applicant could be given either to the subordinate court or to the State, for the reasons mentioned hereinbefore.
The applicant has also drawn the attention of this Court on the case laws mentioned in the petition itself, however, none of these case is helpful to the applicant. Thus, the prayer requested by the applicant could not be acceded. The Final Report has been submitted, the applicant, if he so wishes, may file a protest petition.
In view of the above, the petition filed by the applicant appears to without any merits and the same is dismissed.
Order Date :- 16.8.2021 Anupam S/-