SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri D.N.Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Mayanand Jha, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

(2.) THE sole petitioner, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 10.08.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in Manihari P.S. Case No.18 of 2006. By the said order, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471, 420, 494, 171(C) , 171(F), 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) SRI D.N.Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Officer Incharge has maliciously without any reason included the name of the petitioner as one of the conspirators in the F.I.R, whereas during investigation save and except a bald allegation made in the F.I.R., nothing has come to support the allegation showing involvement of the petitioner in respect of commission of offence of conspiracy. The police submitted chargesheet. Thereafter, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in a mechanical manner without examining the case diary has passed order of cognizance. He further submits that on perusal of the F.I.R. itself, it is evident that whatever allegation, though denied, has been levelled, was pertaining to discharge of his official duty, even without prosecution sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C., chargesheet was submitted and the learned Magistrate ignoring the fact that on record there was no prosecution sanction passed order of cognizance. It was submitted that neither there is any material in the case diary nor technically order of cognizance is sustainable and, as such, order of cognizance is liable to be set aside. It has been emphasized that the petitioner was Class -II Officer, who was removable by the State and in absence of prosecution sanction, order of cognizance is liable to be set aside.