MAHESH PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole Petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 28.2.2002 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 1, Samastipur in Sessions Trial No. 161 of 1986/13 of 2002. By the said order while exercising power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Trial Judge has summoned the Petitioner to face trial alongwith other accused persons.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that the Petitioner was named accused in the first information report alongwith other accused persons for an occurrence in which three persons were murdered. First information report was registered on 24.3.1983 vide Samastipur P.S. Case No. 41 of 1983. However, after investigation the police exonerated the Petitioner but submitted charge-sheet against other accused persons. After submission of the charge-sheet the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 15.6.1986. In the case charges were framed on 13.3.1991 against accused persons. Thereafter, the trial commenced and a number of witnesses were examined and finally the prosecution evidence was closed on 14.12.1995. Thereafter, statement of accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded and judgment was reserved by the Trial Judge. However, before delivery of judgment the Trial Judge noticed that number of witnesses had disclosed the complicity of this Petitioner also in the crime and, as such, by the impugned order i.e. dated 28.2.2002 the learned Trial Judge summoned this Petitioner to face trial alongwith other accused persons.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order dated 28.2.2002 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 1, Samastipur the Petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition which was admitted on 21.5.2003. While admitting the case, it was directed that during the pendency of this application, operation of the order impugned, so far the Petitioner is concerned, shall remain stayed. The order of stay is still continuing.