MANORANJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, by order dated 8.11.1996, notices were ordered to be issued on the Complainant (Opposite Party No. 2). The Opposite Party No. 2, however, despite service of notice, has not chosen to appear in this case.

(2.) THIS application is directed against the order, dated 10.7.2006 whereby and Hereunder the Judicial Magistrate, Patna City in Fatuha P.S. Case No. 258 of 2004 has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for their discharge as envisaged power to exercise under Sec. 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has made a very short submission inasmuch as it is contended that -a petition setting out the materials and grounds seeking the relief of discharge was filed before the Court below but from the impugned order, it would transpire that the same has been rejected mechanically without application of mind. In this regard, it has been contended that there are materials to show that from the joint bank account of Kedar Roy and Manti Devi (Opposite Party No. 2), the victim Kedar Roy had withdrawn amount on several dates. It is, thus, contended that if this be correct, then the allegation of abduction and other offences cannot be made out against the petitioners and, therefore, the charge could not have been framed against them for offences under Sec. 365 of the Indian Penal Code and/or even under other offences such as under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.