DINESHWAR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two aforesaid Petitioners, who are police official, have approached this Court, while invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.2.1999 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in Complaint Case No. 1878 of 1998, whereby the learned Magistrate took cognizance of offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and directed for summoning all the accused persons including Petitioners.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that 2 on 29.10.1998, a complaint was filed by opposite party No. 2 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj vide Complaint Case No. 1878 of 1998 arraying the Petitioner No. 2 as Accused No. 1, one Home Guard Jawan and 18 other Daroga and Constables for an occurrence, which had taken place on the same day i.e. 29.10.1998 at about 7.30 A.M.(morning). The complaint was filed on allegation of committing offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. It was disclosed in the complaint petition that complainant was cousin brother of one Madhusudan Singh, who was not in a position, due to shock of death of his son, to make complaint and as such he had filed the complaint. It was disclosed by the complainant that on the date and time of the occurrence, all the accused persons came to the house of Madhusudan Singh and Accused No. 1 (Petitioner No. 2) along with some Constables entered into the Varandah and other Constables and Daroga surrounded the house. Thereafter, the Petitioner No. 2 told that some persons had came there after 3 committing crime. Whereupon Krishna Prasad Singh @ Anshu, who was sitting in a room told that no one had came there. In the meanwhile, the Accused No. 1(Petitioner No. 2) from his service revolver fired on Anshu whereby he fell down and died. The Accused No. 1(Petitioner No. 2) after coming to know that the said boy was studying at Allahabad and after completing examination of B.A. final, he had come to his house, the Accused No. 1 fired on leg of one Home Guard whereby the Home Guard Jawan received injury. Subsequently, they carried the Jawan and dead body to Hathua Hospital and from there, they came to Gopalganj Police Station, Via Mirganj Police Station and had kept the dead body there on the pretext of getting the postmortem done. It was also alleged that one Yogendra Singh was threatened and thereafter from him on blank papers, signatures and identification was taken. It was also alleged that Accused No. 1 (Petitioner No. 2) had un-authorizedly detained father of the deceased. After filing the complaint, the complainant was examined on S.A. and thereafter, in support of the complaint, altogether 11 witnesses 4 were examined. During the enquiry, certain documents were also produced and thereafter, the learned Magistrate, after examining all the materials being fully satisfied that prima facie case of brutal murder of deceased Krishna Prasad Singh @ Anshu was made out against the Petitioner No. 2, who was, at the relevant time, Officer-in-Charge of Mirganj Police Station, (2) Anmol Yadav, Officer-in-Charge of Uchkagaon Police Station, (3) Dineshwar Kumar, A.S.I. of Mirganj Police Station and other accused whose name had not been furnished by the complainant, who had assisted the murder by showing police powers acting without jurisdiction and as such cognizance for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code was taken against the accused persons including the Petitioners and direction was issued for issuance of processes against the accused persons.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order of cognizance, the aforesaid Petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petition. It was filed on 10.11.1999 and on 17.2.2000, the case was admitted for 5 hearing, notice was directed to be issued to opposite party No. 2, Lower Court Records were called for and pending disposal of this application, it was directed that further proceeding in Complaint Case No. 1878 of 1998 shall remain stayed. The order of stay is still continuing.