- (1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) THIS application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 15.6.2007 passed by the then Chief judicial Magistrate,Ranchi in Ormanjhi P.S case no.02 of 2006 (G.R. No.69 of 2006) whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Sections 217 and 221 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner, who at the relevant point of time was posted as Rural S.P and also against the Investigating Officer, Officer-in-charge and Dy.S.P beside other persons, who have been alleged to have committed murder of Punam Toppo. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that a case was lodged by Poonam Toppo alleging therein that while she was sitting under a tree, four accused persons namely, Hayat Ali Aansari, Firoj Ansari, Ramesh Sahu and Jakir Ansariput her on fire in order to kill her, who subsequently, succumbed to injury. When Punam Toppo had come before the Officer-in-Charge of Ormanjhi Police Station to lodge the case, one Medical Officer, Primary Health Center and B.D.O, Ormanjhi were sitting over there and in their presence statement was given by Punam Toppo. Just before that Mairun Nisha had lodged a case against Punam Toppo wherein it has been alleged that Punam Toppo had assaulted her and that while Mairun Nisha along with her husband Jakir Ansari was in the police station, Punam Toppo came and lodged a case putting allegation against Jakir Ansari and other three persons that they had put her on fire, though Jakir Ansari was sitting right in front of the Officer-in-Charge of Ormanjhi Police Station.
(3.) ON her statement, a case was registered under Sections 307 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code against four accused persons. While the matter was under investigation, a complaint was made before the then Chief Judicial Magistrate by the husband of Punam Toppo to the effect that the Investigating Office has not been arresting the accused person nor he is recording the statement of B.D.O or the Medical Officer, Ormanjhi nor the statement of the victim is being recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but the fact is that statements of the Officer-in-Charge as well as B.D.O were recorded by the Investigating Officer.;