PRAKASH CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cognizance taken against the petitioners by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Koderma in T. R. No. 1543 of 1993 arising out of complaint petition case No. 317 of 1992, by order, dated 11-1-1993 has been assailed for the purpose of quashing,

(2.) The facts of the case travel in a very narrow compass. The complaint petition, dated 3-12-1992 was filed by the opposite party No. 2 alleging that on 2-11-1992, the petitioners alongwith others had cut away and reaped the paddy grown by the complainant in a plot of land situated in the district of Hazaribagh under Mauza Masmaohna of Khata No. 131 under plot No. 451 measuring 0.73 decimal. which belonged to him by way of purchase. It had further been alleged that when he raised objection, the petitioners tried to assault him. The complaint was filed under Sections 147/148/579/411 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) There seems to be no plausible explanation as to the delay in filing of the complaint. It further appears from the record that in respect of same incident, a proceeding under Section 144, Cr. P. C. was initiated by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Koderma in Case No. 246 of 1992, on the basis of an information given by the Mukhiya of the village, but that matter has been suppressed in the complaint petition. After receipt of the complaint and after taking preliminary statement of the petitioner, a report was called for from the Gram Panchayat Pradhan, who submitted a report copy of which has been filed alongwith quashing petition. That report reveals that except the six persons i.e. the petitioners, there were none other at the spot at the alleged time of occurrence which shows that complainant has unnecessrily made 20 persons include in his complaint petition. It was further stated in that report that the first party i.e. the complainant was ready for creating trouble resulting in apprehension of breach of peace and that on enquiry made by the Mukhiya, it was found that the plantation of padd y was raised by the accused petitioners. Even after the receipt of that report, the learned court below took cognizance against the petitioners and such this quashing application has been filed.