BIMAL RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COGNIZANCE is taken in the case under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code for violating the order under section 144 of Code of Criminal Procedure passed by the Subdivisional Magistrate, Patna City. Legality of impugned order is questioned mainly on two grounds. First, the same was time barred, second, no cognizance could be taken basing public complaint. An F.I.R. is lodged on written application of Sri Chandra Krishna Rahtogi alleging therein that the direction (order) of 144 Cr.P.C. proceeding was violated by petitioners. Charge sheet is submitted in the case and cognizance is taken. F.I.R. is lodged on 12.3.2002 showing violation of the order (direction) under section 144 of Code of Criminal Procedure dated 24.1.2002. Charge sheet is submitted in the case on 30.6.2004 is seen by the Magistrate may be taken as date of cognizance, admittedly after one year which is the period of limitation. Offence under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code is punishable for the maximum period of six months for which limitation period is one year. On the second point it is said that there is bar under section 195(1)(a)(I) of the Indian Penal Code that no court shall take cognizance for the offence punishable under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned but in the instant case, F.I.R. (complaint) is lodged by a private public. As such, in any case the order of cognizance (prosecution) is not liable to sustain. In the discussed facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and impugned order dated 5.7.2004 passed in Chowk P. S. Case No. 51/02 by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna City including further prosecution is quashed.