SARITA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, eight petitioners have prayed for quashing of order dated 7.2.10998 passed by Sri A. Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Begusarai in G.R. No. 999 of 1991 (arising out of Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 104 of 1991). By the said order, learned Magistrate had rejected the petition filed on behalf of petitioners-accused for their discharge. The present petition was admitted on 19.3.1998 and while admitting the petition, it was ordered that during the pendency of this application, further proceeding in G.R. No. 999 of 1991 arising out of Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 104 of 1991 pending in the court of Sri A. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Begusarai shall remain stayed.

(2.) In this case, case diary was also received. F.I.R. in the present case was registered only on suspicion in respect of commission of crime. It was alleged by the Executive Magistrate, Begusarai in his written report dated 21.4.1991 addressed to Officer-in-charge of Town Police Station, Begusarai that he on the order of the District Magistrate, Begusarai conducted a raid in the office of Bihar Mahila Vikash Parishad, situated in Mohalla Bishanpur of Begusarai Town, behind the house of one Dr. S.S.P. Choudhary. It was further alleged in the written report that in course of raid it appeared to him from the register that said Bihar Mahila Vikash Parishad (hereinafter referred to as Parishad) was a fake institution. On the apprehension of commission of crime, petitioners were made accused for offences under Sections 419, 420, 472, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. On the basis of said written report, an F.I.R. vide Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 104 of 1991 was registered for the offences mentioned above and after investigation, police submitted charge sheet.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ajay Kumar Thakur, challenging the order of cognizance emphatically argued that even the F.I.R. on suspicion should not have been registered. After registering of F.I.R. during investigation, the Investigating Officer also contacted the office of I.G. Registration and thereafter, a letter was sent by Sri Vikram Prasad, Assistant I.G. Registration. This fact has been noted in paragraph-59 of the case diary and same has been admitted by learned Additional Public Prosecution. The information contained in paragraph-59 of the case diary is specific on the point that the Parishad was registered under the Society Registration Act. Accordingly, Sri Thakur submits that if the Parishad was found during investigation as duly registered with the office of I.G. Registration, it cannot be alleged that the said Parishad was fake. So far as material collected during the investigation regarding collection of membership fee of Rs. 50/- is concerned, it has been submitted that as per the bye-laws of the Parishad, the Parishad had collected the membership fee and no offence can be said to have been committed by the petitioners.