IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.46914 of 2007
SUKHDEB MAHTON
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
4. 09.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
The petitioner prays for quashing of the order of cognizance
under Section 364 A of the Penal Code.
Reliance is placed on the order passed in Cr. Misc. No.
19471 of 2003 quashing the order taking cognizance against co-
accused by order dated 10.5.2004.
First information report was registered against unknown.
The police after investigation submitted final report on 21.8.2000 that
the case was true but that there was no clue. In April, 1997, statement
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded of the victim naming the
petitioner. On 8.2.2002 cognizance has been taken on basis of the
materials on record differing with the Police report. The Magistrate
arrived at the conclusion on discussion of the materials in the case
diary and has even expressed his doubts about the manner of
investigation done. The order dated 10.5.2004 in Cr. Misc. No. 19471
of 2003 is based only on the ground of the statement made under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim; that the Magistrate has taken
cognizance after consideration of the materials in the case diary and
even the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which was prior to the
order of cognizance, appears to have been overlooked. Obviously it
suffers from an error of record. Additionally, in that case the petitioner
came with promptitude in 2003 when the order was passed in May,
-2-
2004. Presently, the petitioner came to the Court more than three years
later in 2007. Nothing has been placed on record of the developments
thereafter in the trial which obviously has commenced.
In all of the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not persuaded to
grant relief to the petitioner on the simple premise of the order in Cr.
Misc. No. 19471 of 2003.
The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)