VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2023 › High Court of Gauhati

Md. Samed Ali v. The State of Assam and 6 Ors

Closed
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
22 May 2023
Bench
Kalyan Rai Suranaauthor
Case no.
WP(C) 2804/2023

Follow Gauhati High CourtFollow Kalyan Rai Surana

Judgment

ORDER Date : 22.05.2023

Heard Mr. A.N. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Sarma, learned Govt. Advocate representing respondent nos.1, 2, 4, 6 and 7, and Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned standing counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 5.

¶2In brief, the case of the petitioner is that his son, aged 14 years had died in a motor vehicle accident, which occurred on 05.06.2012. An FIR to that effect was lodged by the brother of the petitioner, namely, Munser Ali, which was registered as Jurshimali Police Out Post vide GD Entry No.78, corresponding to Chhaygaon P.S. Case No. 146/2012, under section 279/304A IPC. It is projected that accident information report was prepared on 15.06.2012, which contains all the necessary information regarding the accident. However, the petitioner has not been able to collect the relevant documents in support of the Page No.# 3/4 accident. The petitioner claims that he had filed a claim petition before the MACT at Guwahati in the year 2019, being MAC Case No. 1581/2019, but the same could not proceed in the absence of documents.

¶3Having regard to the grievance raised by the petitioner, the Court is of the considered opinion that under the provision of section 159 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is provided as follows: "Information to be given regarding accident.-- The police officer shall, during the investigation, prepare an accident information report to facilitate the settlement of claim in such form and manner, within three months and containing such particulars and submit the same to the Claims Tribunal and such other agency as may be prescribed."

¶4Therefore, from the above, it would appear that the information given regarding a road accident would be sufficient for the claim tribunal to register a proceeding, which has already been done.

¶5It is projected in this writ petition that the petitioner has not been able to obtain a copy of the charge-sheet, MVI Report, Postmortem Report etc. It is also projected that RTI application has been submitted before the Superintendent of Police, Amingaon and only the copy of the GD Entry and copy of the FIR was provided to him.

¶6In the considered opinion of the Court, a charge-sheet submitted in a criminal proceeding is not a document, a copy of which can be provided under RTI Act, and therefore, if the petitioner is the aggrieved person, he can always apply for certified copy of the records of the concerned criminal case where it has been submitted. Similarly, a postmortem report is not a document which can be furnished under the RTI Act as it is a record which is to be tagged with the concerned criminal proceeding. So long as the criminal proceeding is not Page No.# 4/4 registered, the documents are available in the Prosecuting Inspector's office. The only item which is left out is the MVI Report, which the Tribunal is not powerless to call, if such a document is prepared.

¶7Accordingly, the Court is inclined to close this writ petition as because the petitioner has an alternative remedy of obtaining copy of charge-sheet and postmortem report and insofar as the MVI report is concerned, the concerned Tribunal can always be moved to have the report called for from the competent authority. In the event the petitioner is refused the certified copy of charge-sheet and postmortem report, he is permitted to agitate his grievance in any appropriate manner, if required, to approach this Court again.

¶8Accordingly, the Court finds no reason to keep this matter pending and accordingly, the writ petition stands closed with liberty to the petitioner to do the needful as he may so advised.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010106902023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/2804/2023o MD.oSAMEDoALIo S/OoLATEoAFAJoUDDINoRESIDENToOFoVILLAGE-oKANDULIMARI,oP.O-o KALATOLIoBAZAR,oP.S-oCHHAYGAON,oDIST-oKAMRUP,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo6oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVTo OFoASSAM,oHOMEoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06 2:THEoDIRECTORoGENERALoOFoPOLICE oASSAM oULUBARI oGUWAHATI-o7 3:THEoDIRECTORoOFoHEALTHoSERVICE oASSAM oHENGRABARI oGUWAHATI-36 4:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICE oKAMRUP oAMINGAON oGUWAHATI-21 5:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoGUWAHATIoMEDICALoCOLLEGEoANDo HOSPITAL oBHANGAGARH. 6:THEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE CHHAYGAON Page No.# 2/4 POLICE STATON P.O- CHHAYGAON DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN - 781124 7:THE I/C OF JURSHIMALI OUT POST P.O- JURSHIMALI P.S- CHHAYGAON DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A N AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.