Page No. 1/5 GAHC010188032025 2026:GAU-AS:13807 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4963/2025 MUKTA RANI ADHIKARI W/O LATE JOYPRAKASH ADHIKARI, R/O VILL- JEKABNAGAR, P.O.- BALIPIPIA, P.S.- BAZARICHERRA, PIN-788728, DIST- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SRIBHUMI P.O. AND P.S.- KARIMGANJ DIST- SRIBHUMI ASSAM PIN-788710 4:THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE BAZARICHERRA POLICE STATION P.O. AND P.S.- BAZARICHERRA DIST- SRIBHUMI PIN-788727 ASSAM 5:LONGSING KRO INVESTIGATION OFFICER BAZARICHERRA POLICE STATION P.O. AND P.S.- BAZARICHERRA DIST- SRIBHUMI Page No. 2/5 PIN-788728 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, P SHARMA,MS. S. CHANDA,MS. R DEVI,MR. P S BISWAS,MS. U NANDA,MS. K L R YANTHAN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY JUDGMENT Date : 16.09.2026 Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. Handique, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1 – 4. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition stating inter alia that on 13.12.2024, the petitioner’s husband, Jay Prakash Adhikari was travelling as an occupant in an Auto- Rickshaw bearing registration no. AS-10/BC-2004 [‘the subject-vehicle’, for short] from Ichabil Bazar towards his house. When the subject-vehicle reached a place near Nilkantapur, Bazaricherra Police Station, District – Sribhumi, another vehicle bearing registration no. AS-10/E-3313 [‘the offending vehicle’, for short] coming in a rash and negligent manner, hit the subject-vehicle and fled away from the place of occurrence. In the said accident, Jay Prakash Adhikari sustained serious injuries on his person and subsequently, he succumbed to the injuries. The post-mortem examination on the dead body was performed at Silchar Medical College and Hospital. In connection with the accident, the petitioner lodged a First Information Report [FIR] before Nagra Police Petrol Post and the said FIR was registered as Bazaricherra Police Station Case no. 209/2024 under Sections 281/106, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita [BNS] on 23.12.2025. Thereafter, the matter was investigated into. 3. The cause of grievance of the petitioner, projected in this writ petition, is that in the course of investigation of Bazaricherra Police Station Case no. 209/2024, the Investigating Page No. 3/5 Officer [I.O.] submitted a Report on 13.12.2025 stating that during the investigation carried out upto that stage, the identity of the accused, who drove the offending veh cle bearing no. AS-10/E-3313, could not be ascertained. On submission of the Report be ore the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sribhumi, the learned Court called for the case diary as well as personal appearance of the I.O. on 02.04.2025. O 02.04.2025, the learned Court observed that there was negligence on the part of the I O. as he could not even identify the offending vehicle. The I.O. was directed to identify t e offending vehicle at the earliest and to file the report in the final form expeditiously Contending that further investigation was not carried out properly, after the Order dated 0 .04.2025, the petitioner has approached this Court by the present writ petition seek ng proper further investigation into the case. 4. On the previous date of listing, 26.08.2026, Mr. Handique, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the State respondents had submitted that as per the instruction received by him from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Sribhumi, a Final Report had been submitted in Bazaricherra Police Station Case no. 209/2024 after completion of the investigation. He sought for further time to obtain the details about submission of the Final Report. Today, Mr. Handique has placed a photocopy of the Final Report submitted by the I.O. in connection with Bazaricherra Police Station Case no. 209/2024. He has submitted that the I.O. on 30.04.2025 had submitted a Final Report vide F.R. no. 07/2025 concluding that during investigation, sufficient evidence could be found against the driver of the vehicle bearing registration no. AS-10/E-3313. 5. The Final report forwarded by Police after investigation may state that according to the Police, no offence appears to have been committed. When such a Final Report is placed before the Magistrate he has option of adopting one of the three courses open i.e. [1] he may accept the Final Report and drop the proceeding; or [2] he may disagree with the Final Report and take the view that there is sufficient ground for further proceeding, take cognizance of the offence and issue process; or [3] he may direct further investigation to be made by the Police. Page No. 4/5 6. Upon receipt of a Police Report under Section 193[2], Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023, a Magistrate is entitled to take cognizance of an offence under Section 210[1][b] of the BNSS even if the Police Report is to the effect that no case is made out against the accused. The Magistrate can take into account the statements of the witnesses examined by the Police during the investigation and take cognizance of the offence complained of and order the issue of process to the accused. Section 210[1][b], BNSS does not lay down that a Magistrate can take cognizance of an offence only if the Investigating Officer gives an opinion that the investigation has made out a case against the accused. The Magistrate can ignore the conclusion arrived at by the Investigating Officer and independently apply his mind to the facts emerging from the investigation and take cognizance of the case, if he thinks fit, exercise his powers under Section 210[1][b] of the BNSS and direct the issue of process to the accused. The Magistrate is not bound in such a situation to follow the procedure laid down in Sections 223 and 225 of the BNSS for taking cognizance of a case under Section 210[1][a] though it is open to him to act under Section 223 or Section 225 also. For reasons to be recorded, the Magistrate can also direct further investigation by not accepting the Final Report. The informant is not prejudicially affected when the Magistrate decides to take cognizance and/or to proceed with the case to proceed in any of the afore-mentioned manners. But where the Magistrate decides that sufficient ground does not subsist for proceeding further and drops the proceeding or takes the view that there is material for proceeding against some and there are insufficient grounds in respect of others, the informant would certainly be prejudiced as the First Information Report lodged becomes wholly or partially ineffective. Where the Magistrate decides not to take cognizance and to drop the proceeding or takes a view that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against some of the persons mentioned in the First Information Report, notice to the informant and grant of opportunity of being heard is mandatory. 7. It is not brought to the notice of this Court whether the petitioner has received any notice or not from the jurisdictional Magistrate’s Court where the Final Report dated Page No. 5/5 30.04.2025 has been filed. The petitioner has not stated whether the Final Report has been accepted or not by the jurisdictional Magistrate Court where it is filed. It is open for the complainant/informant to file a Protest Petition before the jurisdictional Magistrate when the Police files a final report instead of a charge-sheet after completing the investigation. Through the Protest Petition the complainant/informant can make a prayer before the jurisdictional Magistrate to reject the Police’s conclusions and independently examine whether sufficient materials exist to take cognizance of the offence or to direct further investigation. 8. As the Final Report has already been submitted vide F.R. no. 07/2025 on 30.04.2025 and it is open for the petitioner to submit objection against the Final Report and/or also to seek further investigation into the matter if the petitioner is not satisfied in the manner in which the investigation was carried out, the present writ petition stands disposed of, giving such liberty to the petitioner. 9. The instructions placed by Mr. Handique along with a photocopy of the Final Report, that is, F.R. no. 07/2025 is kept with the case record by marking it as Document – ‘A’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant Ananta Konwar 2026.09.17 16:37:27 +05'30'