RAJU SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report of Akbarnagar RS. Case No. 7 of 2005, contained in Annexure -2, which has been wrongly instituted against the petitioner and others where as for the same incident the police had already registered Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 one day prior to the instant case and also for a direction to merge Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7/2005 into Kajraili P.S. Case No. 8 of 2005 as also to declare Akbarnagar P.S. Case No. 7 of 2005 as illegal, arbitrary and in violative of Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the Code).

(3.) ON 7.12.2005 the informant/Narendra Kumar has reported the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur stating therein that on 6.12.2005 he alongwith other police personnel proceeded from the police station for patrolling and he got a confidential information that rice of Food Corporation loaded on a truck has been brought and being unloaded near railway Gumti at Village Hario. The informant proceeded from village Khiraiya and while he reached near Railway Gumti he saw a truck No. W.B. 030432. standing near the Gumti where few persons were standing and others were unloading. The informant ordered to stay there and reached, thereafter three persons standing near the truck proceeded toward southern side, out of that two persons were apprehended by him and one succeeded to flee away. They disclosed their names as Chandan Kumar and Pramod Yadav. While the informant asked the name of persons unloading the bags, they disclosed their name as Niranjan Kumar Mandal Akhilesh Mandal and Mukesh Paswan who were labourers. They also disclosed the name of the driver Binod Paswan who escaped from there. Apprehended persons disclosed that they are employees of transporter of State Food Corporation namely, Bibhishan Kumar and on the direction of him the rice bags are being unloaded in the godown of Raju Sah. Accordingly the bags of rice were seized by the informant. The accused persons did not produce any paper of ownership of rice which appears to be of Food Corporation. A seizure list prepared in presence of the witnesses.