LAWS(PAT)-2010-4-399

SUKHLAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On April 23, 2010
SUKHLAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

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 order dated 17.2.1998 passed in Complaint Case No.854 of 1997 by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah.By the said order, learned Magistrate had taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 147,447 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of order dated 13.4.1999 passed in Cr. Revision No.51 of 1998/3 of 1999 passed by A.D.J.II, Nawadah. By the said order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the Cr. Revision No.51 of 1998,which was filed against the order of cognizance.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that the opposite party no.2 filed a complaint petition in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah vide Complaint Case No.854 of 1997. It was alleged by the complainant that the accused persons including the petitioner, who was at the relevant time Mukhiya of Orhanpur Panchayat, forcibly was stacking earth with a view to create a public road. It was alleged by the complainant that this Court in a writ petition had directed not to make any construction on the private land of the petitioner.

(3.) It was also alleged by the complainant that in a suit filed by the complainant, there was an order of injunction even then in contravention of all the directions of the court, the accused persons forcibly has committed the offence alleged by the complainant by way of making/creating a road on the private land of the complainant. After filing the complaint petition, the complainant was examined on S.A. and in support of his complaint, the complainant examined three witnesses,who categorically corroborated the allegation of the complainant. The learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate after being satisfied with the materials available on record, by the impugned order has taken cognizance as mentioned above.