YUGAL KISHORE MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

(2.) THE two petitioners have sought quashing of K.Hat Police Station Case No. 149 of 2005 including the order dated 30.01.2006 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Purnia taking cognizance for the offences under Section 409, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners tried to laid emphasis that there was no mensrea for the offences against either of the two petitioners and case of petitioner no. 1 has further been improved as he has already been exonerated in the departmental enquiry. No doubt, this is not the case with the petitioner no. 2, but so far mensrea is concerned it was also not proved against him. It is also contended that there was no evidence before the court below attracting commission of offence at the hands of petitioners. On the other hand on behalf of the opposite party, it is contended that there was sufficient evidence and even in paragraph no. 101 of the case diary which finds mentioned in the impugned order. THE Superintendent of Police while supervising the investigation has found that there is some material, of course some more is required and since investigation against others is also going on. It cannot be said that there is absolutely no possibility of availability of any evidence.