AMAR NATH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code '). It is directed against the order dated 18.8.1998 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani in Cr. Revision No. 1061 of 1998 filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 by which he was pleased to set aside the order dated 25.7.1998 passed Shri V.K. Mishra, Judicial Magistrate, llnd Class, Madhubani in complaint Case No. 408 /97 / Tr No. 669/98

(2.) IT appears that the opposite party no. 2 had filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani, being C.R. Case No. 408/97 against the present petitioner and two others, namely, Gauri Shankar Singh, District Supply Officer and Shri Ram Kripal Yadav, Marketing Officer. At the relevant time the complainant -opposite party no. 2 was dealing in the sale of gas cylinders and was also running a photostat business. The present petitioner was the Supply Inspector posted at Madhubani (Town), P.S. Madhubani. On 20.8.1997 the peon of Gauri Shanker Singh, District Supply Officer came with 4 kg. gas cylinder (light) and asked opposite party no. 2 to fill the same to which he refused since he told him that he does not deal with the business of gas filling. After some time the accused persons including the petitioner came there and as pointed out by the peon of the District Supply Officer they entered into the shop premises of opposite party no. 2. They assaulted him with fists and slaps as also with a hunter. They seized 5 empty gas cylinders and one full gas cylinder and obtained the signature of opposite party no. 2 on the seizure list. The photostat machine of opposite party no. 2 was also damaged as a result of which he sustained a loss of Rs. 2,000/ -. Accordingly, he filed a complaint petition against the Supply Officer, Shri Gauri Shanker Singh and Shri Amar Nath (present petitioner) and one Ram Kripal Yadav. The cognizance of the offence against them was taken by the Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 7.3.1998 under sections 323, 504, 452, 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judicial Magistrate also ordered for issuance of summons against them.

(3.) OPPOSITE party no. 2 filed a criminal revision against this order being Cr. Revision No. 1061/98 which was heard and disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani by his order dated 18.6.1998. By this order the learned Sessions Judge held that there was no necessity for obtaining any sanction order to prosecute the accused persons since in this case both the parties were alleging certain illegal acts on the part of the other and also since the learned Judicial Magistrate himself admitted and stated in his order that the accused persons (including the present petitioner) had exceeded their limit of official duty. The learned Sessions Judge, accordingly, set aside the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate by which he had directed the opposite party no. 2 to obtain the sanction orrder by 26.8.1998.