JITENDRA KUMAR SINGH SON OF UPENDRA PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR,; PREM CHAND MISHRA @ PRABHASH CHANDRA MISHRA AND R P SINGH, A S I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole petitioner has prayed for quashing of an order dated 4.1.1999 passed by Sri R.N. Tiwary, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnia in Complaint Case No. C.A765 of 1998. By the said order, the learned Magistrate under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had rejected the complaint filed by the petitioner, mainly on the ground of non-availability of prosecution sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that the petitioner filed a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnia, which was numbered as Complaint Case No. 765 of 1998. In the complaint petition, it was alleged that while the petitioner was going to D.S. College, Katihar for appearing in the Examination and was at the Bus Stand, he was apprehended by accused No. 2, who was Officer Incharge of Jalalgarh Police Station, Purnia. He was brought to Police Station. Thereafter, the mother and other family members of the petitioner rushed to the Police Station after getting information that the petitioner was arrested. It was alleged in the complaint petition that while the mother of the petitioner approached the Officer Incharge/Opp.Party No. 2, he demanded Rs. 25000/-as illegal gratification. With a view to get her son released from the clutch of the Opp.Party No. 2, the mother of the petitioner was left with no option but to arrange some money and she returned. After some time, any how she arranged Rs. 5000/- and thereafter she again went to the Police Station. After noticing the fact that the mother of the petitioner was going to give Rs. 5000/- to Opp.Party No. 2 in the Police Station itself, the petitioner asked his mother not to pay any farthing to Opp.Party No. 2. This was enough for Opp.Party No. 2 and he became furious and after taking Rs. 5000/- from the mother of the petitioner, he started assaulting the petitioner. The mother of the petitioner tried to save him, but Opp.Party No. 3 who was an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police in the same Police Station forcibly dragged out his mother from the Police Station. In the assault, the petitioner received severe injuries and it was asserted in the complaint petition that one hand of the petitioner was fractured due to severe assault given by Opp.Party No. 2. On the aforesaid allegation, complaint petition was filed. Along with complaint petition, some relevant documents were also filed. After filing of complaint petition, the complainant was examined on SA. and in support of the complaint case, seven witnesses were examined as enquiry witnesses, who categorically supported the case of the complainant. The learned Magistrate after conducting enquiry by its order dated 4.1.1999 rejected the complaint petition under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order of rejection of complaint petition, the petitioner filed a revision vide Cr.Rev. No. 61 of 1999, which too stood rejected by order dated 22.3.2001. After rejection of the revision petition, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition and it was admitted on 18.1.2002 and lower court record was also called for and the same has been received, which is kept on record of the present case. While admitting, it was directed to issue notice to Opp.Party Nos. 2 and 3. Subsequently, Opp.Parties entered their appearance through Counsel. Despite Vakalatnama was filed on behalf of Opp.Party Nos. 2 and 3, at the time of hearing none appeared.