MD.MUNIR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2002-3-37
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on March 07,2002

Md.Munir Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Deoki Nandan Prasad - (1.) 1. This Criminal Revision is directed a gainst the order dated 11.9.2001 passed in S.T. No. 26 of 2001, whereby and whereunder the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh rejected the prayer of the petitioner for discharge.
(2.) THE short facts giving rise to this application is that the Officer -in - Charge of Heredari Police Station alongwith other police officials were on patrolling duty on 13.1.2000 and as soon asthey reached near village Kokaru, he received information that a Maruti Van No. BR -14E -4241 is coming with some terrorists, who are carrying explosive substance and after some time the said vehicle was seen when the driver of the said vehicle was signaled to stop but he tried to flee away towards Tandawa. Thereafter, the informant and other police officials surrounded the vehicle which was stopped later on and the persons boarded in the vehicle were apprehended. They disclosed their names as Javedh Akhter, Samim Ansari and Aslam Hussain. Four Gunny bags were recovered containing explosive materials in a Cartoon. Accordingly, the seizure list was prepared in presence of the witnesses. The accused persons failed to produce any valid paper or document with regard to the huge materials of explosive and on enquiry, the accused persons accepted their guilt and also admitted that on the instruction of the leaders of M. C. C. they have brought the same from one Md. Munir (Petitioner). It is also stated that they had purchased the said materials by paying Rs. 1,000/ -. Accordingly, the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908 and Section 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act.
(3.) THE police investigated into the case and submitted charge - sheet against all the accused persons including the petitioner. Cognizance was also taken by the Court below. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for discharge which was rejected by the order impugned. Hence, this revision.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.