ARUN KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It has been sub- mitted by Sri Rana Pratap Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners that during the pendency of this petition, petitioner No. 5 has died.

(2.) Eight petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 14.6.2000 passed by the learned 10th Addl. Sessions Judge, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 1195 of 1999. By the said order, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has rejected the discharge petition of the petitioners filed under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On earlier occasion also after the order of cognizance, petitioners had approached this Court by filing a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vide Cr. Misc. No. 18700 of 1998 and Cr. Misc. No. 19126 of 1998. At the time of admission of the said petitions, it was vehemently opposed by Opp. Party No. 2 and finally, both the petitions were disposed of on 23.2.1999 by a bench of this Court with an observation that if petition for discharge is filed by the petitioners, the same shall be considered by the Court below and shall be disposed of expeditiously by passing a reasoned order. Accordingly, at the stage of charge, the petitioners in the light of the order of this Court dated 23.2.1999 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18700 of 1998 with Cr. Misc. No. 19126 of 1998 filed a petition along with number of documents under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for their discharge. However, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge keeping in view the scope of the trial Court under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure rejected the same. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has observed that even on the basis of strong suspicion charges can be framed, which is settled principle of law.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order of rejection of discharge petition, i.e. order dated 14.6.2000, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petition, which was finally admitted on 22.7.2004. While admitting, it was directed that the interim order dated 18.10.2000 shall continue till disposal of the case.