IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.16328 of 2008
MUZAFFAR KHAN
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR & ANR
-----------
02 29-06-2010 Heard Mr. Dharmesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the State.
It is a peculiar case that while invoking inherent
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the petitioner has challenged an order, which was passed
long back on 25.4.2000, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance of offence. It was submitted by Sri Dharmesh Kumar,
learned counsel for the petitioner that in the case F.I.R. was lodged in
the year 1991 and thereafter investigation proceeded. However, during
the investigation, the police found that it was the informant, who had
instituted a false case and thereafter a petition was filed for making
him accused for offences under Sections 182 and 211 of the Indian
Penal Code and thereafter a petition was filed by the Investigating
Officer of the case in the court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Sherghati for issuance of process against Md. Manjay
Yahiya Khan, who was the informant of the case. It was further
submitted that after change of the Investigating Officer, suddenly new
Investigating Officer without any material in a mechanical manner has
submitted chargesheet and on the same term the learned Magistrate has
taken cognizance of offence. It was also submitted that after
investigation had proceeded, the same was supervised by the
2
Dy.Superintendent of Police, Sherghati and he was also of the opinion
that due to land dispute, the present case was falsely filed by the
informant.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, though the court
was not inclined to entertain the present petition on the ground of
delay, however since it was submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that after order of cognizance the case has not proceeded, it
is necessary to call for the entire case diary including the supervision
notes. In this case, it would be necessary to examine the same. it was
submitted that the petitioner has already appeared before the court
below.
Accordingly call for the entire case diary and supervision
note in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No.109 of 1991 and also
a report from the court below regarding status of the aforesaid case.
Put up this case after receipt of the same.
NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar, J )