- (1.) The petitioners, by way of filing the present criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for quashing the order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special judicial Magistrate, CBI, Dhanbad in R.C. Case No. 4(S)/06 and R.C. Case No. 5(S)/06 (subsequently amalgamated vide order dated 9.2.2009 as R.C. Case No. 4(S)/06) whereby, the learned court below took the cognizance under Sections 147, 149, 323, 304 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. The criminal revision petition is preferred by the informant/complainant being aggrieved and dissatisfied by order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Dhanbad in R.C. Case No. 4(S)/06 and R.C. Case No. 5(S)/06 (subsequently amalgamated vide order dated 9.2.2009 as R.C. Case No. 4(S)/06), whereby, the learned court below did not take cognizance under Section 302, IPC though, prima facie, ingredients of the said Section were available from the materials on record and took cognizance under Sections 147, 149, 323, 304 and 120-B of the IPC.
(2.) The learned counsel for the parities in both the proceedings have jointly requested that since both the proceedings are arising out of the common order dated 9.2.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Dhanbad and, therefore, both the matters may be heard together and disposed of.
(3.) Considering the above request, made by the learned counsel for the parties appearing in both the above referred proceedings, the Writ Petition as well as Cr. Revision Petition are taken up for hearing.;