LAWS(PAT)-2008-1-11

SANJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 14, 2008
SANJAY SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for quashing the order dated 23.7.2007 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra ir U.T. 304 of 2007, arising out of Sonepur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2004, by which he has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 147, 143, 149, 341, 324, 307, 435, 436, 427 of the I.P.C. and Sec. 27 of the Arms Act against the petitioners.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 19.2.2004 in the morning the informant saw a tractor loaded with sand at the Hariharnath Chowk and asked the driver for the tall of sand lifting on which the driver went to call his employer. After some time several persons along with the petitioners and others came variously armed and assaulted him. After some time the named persons in the F.I.R. including the petitioners along with 200 -250 persons came to the house of Sadhu Yadav and started firing. The informant and others also fired in retaliation. The mob set fire and took away Rs. 40,000/ - and a licencee revolver from the house of brother of informant.

(3.) DURING the course of investigation the informant Madhusudan Yadav filed an application before the police that the theft of revolver and cash of Rs. 40,000/ - was not correct as those were found lying in the room of Sadhu Yadav itself. Thereafter both the informant and the accused persons compromised both the cases and a compromise petition, Annexure -4, indicates that the informant has filed a compromise petition stating that he does not want to prosecute with the case. No specific allegation of overt act has been attributed against the petitioners and the fathers ' name of the petitioners is a also not correct in the F.I.R. The Investigating Officer found the case doubtful, gave direction that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners. After completion of investigation the police submitted charge -sheet against only Subodh Singh and lack of evidence against the petitioners.