LAL BABU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 04.12.2015 passed by the Rail Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, in Raxaul Rail (GRP) P.S. Case No.12 of 2012 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the Petitioner and others for the offence under Section(s) 302, 201, 120-B Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Counsel for the Petitioner submits that Petitioner is witness of Raxaul Rail P.S. Case No.12 of 2012 filed by Shane Elahi (informant) registered under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code levelling specific allegation against three named accused persons for killing one Shankar Mahto by firearm. The police after about three years of filing of the case submitted supplementary charge-sheet without any material against the Petitioner and others for the offence under Section(s) 302, 201, 120-B Indian Penal Code on 20.10.2015 on the basis of observation of the Superintendent of Police and Dy. Superintendent of Police. The police did not submit charge-sheet against main accused (assailants) named in the written report. There is specific allegation against Md. Abbas Mian, Md. Ashab Mian and Md. Javed Mian of causing murder of Shankar Mahto. During investigation, the Petitioner, who was one of the witness, along with other witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The police made prayer in the Court below for issuance of Warrant of Arrest against the Petitioner on 23.08.2013 as well as against the Informant. Protest Petition was also filed against the conduct of the police on 17.11.2012 before the Magistrate, but no order has been passed on the Protest Petition. Copy of the Protest Petition filed before the Court below has been filed enclosed as Annexure-4.

(3.) Petitioner further submits that the police at no stage prayed for Warrant of Arrest against the named accused persons, who were alleged in the written report to be main culprit. The police in very routine and mechanical manner submitted supplementary charge-sheet against the Petitioner and eight other accused persons although there was absolutely no material on record except that some persons used the mobile during course of incident.