Jaya Roy - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THE petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 364A/395 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau. The prosecution case in brief is that the Fardbayan of the informant is recorded by A.S.I. of Chainpur Police Station at Sadar Hospital on 16.02.2011 at about 11.30 A.M. wherein it is alleged that the informant is the Post Master of Nawadih Post Office on 14.02.2011 after performing his duty he was returning on motor cycle and at 6.P.M. reached near Semara mine then six persons stopped him, out of them he identified Akhilesh Prasad, Awadhesh Prasad and Uma Prasad and they were armed with Deshi Pistol. Akhilesh Prasad assaulted the informant and snatched a sum of Rs.25,106/- and his mobile phone and ultimately after tied his eyes and his both hands by putting clothes and took him in the forest area and they asked him to tell his family members to give Rs. 5,00,000/-. Thereafter when the aforesaid persons were sleeping, the informant managed to untie his hands and fled away from their clutch but the accused persons seeing him fleeing away from their clutch, they fired upon him but it did not hit -3- A.B.A. No 934 of 2012 him and he reached to the house of Bachhu Oraon and narrated the entire incident to him. Thereafter, the informant went to the Police Station but as he was not in a position to speak, he was referred to Sadar Hospital. Thereafter, the instant case has been lodged against the petitioners and three other unknown persons. Mr. P.C. Tripathy, the learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that after investigation the police has submitted final report against the present petitioners as the police could not find any evidence against them. Thereafter a protest complaint petition is filed which is registered as Complaint Case No. 1229 of 2011 and cognizance was taken by the court below under Section 364A I.P.C.
(3.) MR. Tripathy has further submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case as because the petitioner no.1 namely Akhilesh Prasad earlier had taken a loan of Rs.50,000/- from the informant and only in order to get the sum, the present case has been lodged against the petitioners. It is further contended that the informant has not disclosed the name of the petitioners to Bachhu Oraon. It is also contended that though it is alleged that the petitioners was asked to give a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and for this he has made call to his family members but no phone number is mentioned in the F.I.R. nor in the case diary which casts doubt on the prosecution case regarding the demand of the alleged ransom. It is also submitted that the petitioners and the informant are residing adjacent to each other and there is a dispute regarding the aforesaid loan amount between them. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that there is specific and direct allegation against the petitioners, but he has not disputed -3- A.B.A. No 934 of 2012 the aforesaid contentions made by Mr. Tripathy, senior counsel appearing for the petitioners.;