SAHABUDDIN @ SAHABUDDIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Sanjeev Kumar No.1, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Ram Chandra Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(2.) Four petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, have prayed for quashing of part of the order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Purnea in Cr. Revision No.36 of 2009. The petitioners, after the order of cognizance dated 3.12.2008, preferred revision for setting aside the order of cognizance. The learned Magistrate, in Complaint Case No.2401 of 2008, Trial No.2779 of 2009, after conducting enquiry, had taken cognizance of offence under Sections 323 and 423 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The revisional court did not interfere with the order of cognizance, but he clarified that incorrectly instead of summoning the accused persons under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused persons were summoned for offence under Sections 323 and 423 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned revisional court observed that in view of the facts and evidences, Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code was applicable.