‘Informant as investigating officer does not vitiate probe without proven bias’: High Court in 1988 case

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court, in a recent ruling, clarified that an informant acting as the investigating officer (IO) does not inherently vitiate an investigation unless bias is proven. The bench of Justice Prasenjit Biswas was moved by appellants, Subu Roy and Chandi Adhikary, against a 1990 special court ruling. The appellants were convicted for transporting 23.41 quintals of rice without a license on May 7, 1988, violating the West Bengal Rice and Paddy Licencing and Control Order, 1967. The special court, Murshidabad had sentenced Adhikary to four months of rigorous imprisonment under the Essential Commodities Act. The prosecution’s case rested on the interception of a truck by the District Enforcement Officer (DEO) at Jalangi bus stand, Berhampore. Subu Roy, the driver, identified Adhikary as the rice owner, who failed to produce any permit. The rice was seized, weighed and stored at a godown. Three witnesses, including the DEO (also the IO), testified while the defense presented no evidence.

The appellants argued that the DEO’s dual role as complainant and IO compromised the investigation. The court rejected this, finding no evidence of bias and affirming the prosecution’s evidence, including witness testimonies and the seizure list. Relying on a Supreme Court judgement, the high court noted: “…where informant officer is the Investigator by that itself it cannot be said that the investigation is vitiated on the ground of bias or the like factor and the question of bias or prejudice would depend upon facts and circumstances of each case and on the sole ground that informant himself is the Investigating Officer in that case accused is not entitled to acquittal.” The court upheld the conviction, noting the clear violation of licensing regulations. Considering the 37-year lapse since the incident and Adhikary’s status as a first offender, the court set aside the imprisonment, releasing him on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.