R.R.PRASAD, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Counsel appearing for the C.B.I.
(2.) THIS application has been filed under Section 482, Cr PC for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of case bearing No. R.C. 11(S)/2003/C.B.I./SCR -III/ND lodged by the C.B.I. (G.R. No. 2858 of 2003) pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, C.B.I. - cum -S.D.J.M., Dhanbad including the order taking cognizance of the offences under Section 120B read with Sections 193/194/218/203 of Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of Arms Act. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that one Pramod Kumar Singh, after coming home from the Railway Station on private taxi was about to enter into his house, was shot dead by some miscreants and was immediately removed to hospital where in presence of Officer In -charge of Seraidhela Police Station as well as the doctor as also four witnesses made statements that while he was about to enter into his house, accused Ramadhin Singh and Rajiv Ranjan Singh came all of a sudden over there and on being exhorted by Ramadhin Singh, Rajiv Ranjan Singh pumped in so many bullets causing several gun shot injuries and upon it, Dhanbad (Dhansar) P.S. Case No. 638 of 2003 was instituted under Section 307/34 of Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of Arms Act but when Pramod Kumar Singh died, Section 302 of Indian Penal Code was also added. It was further submitted that while the matter was under investigation, the investigation of the case was taken up by the C.B.I, at the instance of the State Government and almost after three years of the occurrence, the C.B.I, could lay hand upon Kashmiri Khan and Mohd. Ayub Khan @ Nanhe who are said to have given their statements under Section 164 of Cr PC but before giving statements under Section 164 of Cr PC they had been taken on remand by the police.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel further submits that it is said that said Kashmiri Khan in his statement made under Section 164 of Cr PC disclosed that one Kharak Singh @ Sami Akhtar came to him and asked him to commit murder of Pramod Kumar Singh, as he had taken contract from one Suresh Singh of killing him and then Kharak Singh @ Sami Akhtar gave money to one Hira Khan who committed murder of Pramod Kumar Singh and thereafter the C.B.I, arrested this petitioner whose name is Syed Md. Akhtar taking him as Kharak Singh @ Sami Akhtar without any material whatsoever and as such the C.B.I, can be said to have violated the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. and Ors. reported in : 1994CriLJ1981 and in the case of D.K. Basu v. State of W.B. reported in : 1997CriLJ743 holding therein that the Police Officer must satisfy himself before arresting anyone about the necessity and justification of such arrest on the basis of some investigation, as any arrest without any justification jeopardizes the life or personal liberty to a person as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.;