MOIZUDDIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing an order dated 23-2-1991 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah, whereby he has taken cognizance for the offence under Section 366 of the Indian Panal Code against the petitioner.

(2.) A letter, purported to have been written by one Smt. Anar Devi, was received by the District and Sessions Judge, Nawadah, in which it was mentioned that the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner and she was still under confinement along with six other ladies. The said latter was . forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah, who perused the contents of the letter and by his order dated 7-5-1990 sent the same in original to the Officer-incharge, Nawadah, for instituting a case and to investigate. The police after investigation, submitted a final report, as the case being false. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, thereafter, perused the case diary and the statements of the witnesses. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, however, held that there was sufficient evidence in the case diary against the petitioner. He did not agree with the final report, submitted by the police. In the impugned order he has discussed about the statements of the witnesses in detail. Considering the entire materials, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah, took cognizance under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and further held that there was no evidence against the son of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the police after thorough investigation has found the case maliciously false. The case was also supervised by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police and both of them came to a definite conclusion that the case was absolutely false. There was no material in the case diary on the basis of which the learned Magistrate could take cognizance. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is a doctor and a man of old age, therefore, it was not expected from him to commit such an offence. According to the learned counsel the informant is a lady of easy virtue. He has further submitted that the letter in question was not sent by the lady in question rather it was sent by one Parsuram Singh.