Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 5.8.2014 and 5.7.2014, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Garhwa in S.T. No. 169 of 2010 and S.T. No. 112 of 2012 whereby and whereunder application preferred by the petitioner under section 91 of Cr.P.C. and under section 233 (2) of Cr.P.C. had been rejected.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that three kidnapped persons, who were subsequently released were named in the FIR and for the first time one Uday Nath Dhar Dubey disclosed about his kidnapping along with one Sarwesh Dhar Dubey. It has further been submitted that statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. of three witnesses were recorded after 10 to 11 months after the occurrence. It has further been submitted that in fact the father's name of the persons kidnapped was changed from Sonadhar Dubey to Raj Narayan Dubey in the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C.;