IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.16599 of 2005
ASHOK KUMAR RAI, S/O SRI RAM NANDAN RAI,
R/O VILLAGE-BARAUNI BARIYARPUR, P.S. TEGHRA,
DISTRICT-BEGUSARAI.
-PETITIONER
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR -OPP.PARTY
_______
For the petitioner : M/s Ajay Kr. Thakur &
Ravi Ranjan -I
For the State : Smt. Indu Bala Pandey,
APP.
3 06.08.2010
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
During the course of arguments, certified copy
of final form has been submitted. Let it be kept on record.
This application has been filed under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of
impugned order dated 10th March, 2005 passed by Sri S.D.
Vishwakarma, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Begusarai, in Non-FIR P.S. Case no. 35 of 2002 refusing the
prayer to drop the proceeding.
At the instance of the petitioner Teghra P.S.
Case no. 35 of 2002 for the offences under Sections 447, 323,
341, 384 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code was instituted wherein
2
after investigation, Police submitted final form no.41 of 2002
dated 24.4.2002, towards the end of which it is mentioned
that separate application for taking action against the
informant under Sections 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal
Code is being submitted.
The petitioner had already filed protest petition
and prayed the Court to take cognizance and on hearing the
parties and perusing the case diary etc. by order dated
31.01.2003 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai,
took cognizance against the accused persons named in Teghra
P.S. Case no.35 of 2002 and transferred the case for trial to
another Court. Almost five months thereafter same Chief
Judicial Magistrate, on perusing the prosecution report
submitted in Teghra P.S. Case no.35 of 2002 under Sections
182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code took cognizance
against the petitioner vide order dated 17.6.2002 in terms of
case for needful where on appearance on behalf of the
petitioner petition was filed to drop the proceeding. On
hearing, the court below appears refusing the prayer only on
the ground that after taking cognizance petitioner did not
chose to raise any objection to the competent court.
3
Since the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Begusarai, has already taken view other than the out come of
the investigation and submission of final form, took
cognizance for the offence against the accused persons, there
is no room left for any action to be taken against the
informant under Sections 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal
Code as recommended by the Investigating Agency since this
proceeding is permitted to continue it shall be nothing but
abuse of process of law and sheer wastage of precious
judicial time.
In view of the above, the impugned order as
well as further proceeding instituted vide order dated
17.06.2003 against the petitioner under Sections 182 and 211
of the Indian Penal Code is quashed.
(Akhilesh Chandra, J.)
AAhmad