RAVINDRA NATH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. at the instance of eight of the ten accused of Complaint Case No. 140 (C)/2002 (Tr. No. 837/2004) presently pending in the Court of Shri Prem Chand Pandey, Judicial Magistrate. First Class. Buxar, is directed against order dated 13-7-2004 passed by Shri Gopal Jee, the learned Judicial Magistrate, IInd Class, Buxar, whereby he had taken congnizance of offences under Sections 148 and 323 I. P. C.

(2.) It appears that on the basis of the fardbeyan given on 13-5-1984 by one Sudama Singh (O. P. No. 2 herein) in respect of an alleged occurrence taking place earlier that day, Buxar (Town) P. S. Case No. 126/84 under various sections of the Penal Code and Section 27 Arms Act was registered wherein the police after due investigation submitted a final form on 19-11-1984 stating inter alia that a Title Suit and Criminal cases were going on between the parties. The police also recommended for prosecution of the informant under Sections 182/211 I. P. C. It further appears that the learned Court below having accepted the final form proceeded with the protest petition filed by the informant during the pendency of the investigation of the police case, as a complaint case and it was numbered as 326(C)/1984. However, the said complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 20-10-1986. It also appears that notwithstanding the dismissed of the complaint case, the said informant, after about 16 years filed another complaint petition on 29-1 -2002 on the same set of facts which was numbered as 140 (C)/2002 and therein congnizance has been taken by the impugned order pursuant to an enquiry under Section 202 Cr. P. C.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the instant complaint had been filed with ulterior motive to harass the petitioners. It has also been submitted that to entertain a complaint on the same set of facts which had been found to be false by the police in course of investigation and sixteen years after the dismissal of the complaint case was an abuse of the process of Court.