ANANDA SEN,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner, by filing this application, has challenged the order dated 09.12.2015, passed in Cr. Revision No. 40 of 2015 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Sahibganj, whereby he has upheld the order dated 23.04.2015, passed in G.R. No. 885 of 2013, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj, by which the cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and, thereafter, notices have been issued to the accused persons, who were on bail and non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the accused Sahnawaj Ansari and Mithun Ansari (Petitioner herein). Further the petitioner has also challenged the order dated 23.04.2015, passed in G.R. Case No. 885 of 2013 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj.
(3.) The main contention of the petitioner, in this application, is that the police submitted charge sheet under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, but the petitioner was not sent up for trial. It is contended that in spite of the fact that the petitioner was not sent up for trial, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate while taking cognizance of the offences, has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner. His submission is that from perusal of the impugned order, it is quite clear that on what material the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has differed with the police report, has not been mentioned. He submits that in fact there is no material to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner and therefore, the impugned order is absolutely bad.;