AWADHESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD earned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) IN the matter of private complaint the learned Magistrate passed an order under Section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and required the police to investigate into the offence and submit the charge-sheet. Accordingly the charge-sheet was submitted and the accused was summoned. The Court took cognizance of the matter and thereafter, proceeded further with the matter. Charges were levelled against the accused on 27.1.1997. The first witness for the prosecution was examined on 18.2.1997. Bailable warrants were issued against the witnesses on 21.21.1998 and since thereafter, nothing was done in the matter. The accused although was in attendance but unfortunately the trial Court took an approach of apathy and did not proceed further. It appears that on 6.5.2000 the INvestigating Officer made an application under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking the permission of the Court and requiring a mandate against the accused to give his signatures for purposes of comparison an analysis. The application was opposed by the accused and was rejected by the trial Court, The original complainant Prem Chand Ram being aggneved by the order dated 6.5.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Barh in G.R. Case No. 142/96 (Trial No. 166/2000) took up the matter in revision before the Court of Sessions. The learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Barh heard earned Counsel for the parties in Cr. Revision No. 41/2000, set aside the order passed by the learned trial Court, allowed the revision and directed the Sub-INspector R.C. Rai to take signature of Opposite Party No. 2 in the manner as the prosecution agency wants.

(3.) I have heard earned Counsel for the parties at length.