ABDUL MOIN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order under challenge is dated 12.7.2006 passed in G.R. No. 848/2006, Tr. No. 2667/2006 (State vs. Abdul Moin Ansari) by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram, whereby and whereunder on submission of charge -sheet he has passed the order of cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 171(G) of Indian Penal Code for his trial.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner is the Junior Engineer, Sone High Level Division, Sasaram, in the district of Rohtas. Rabindra Singh is the informant of the case who on the relevant date i.e. 16.6.2006 was the Block Development Officer -Returning Officer at the time when the counting of Mukhia Gram Panchayat election was in the process. At the said time this petitioner was deputed as an Observer in respect of Table No. 6 where counting of votes cast for the Mukhia election was in the process. One Ram Raj Singh, husband of Smt. Shanti Singh, who was one of the candidates for the post of Mukhia of NAD Gram Panchayat, protested regarding irregularities in the process of counting and as such votes were recounted in presence of B.D.O., Junior Engineer, N.R.E.P. and the . Officer -in -charge of Sheo Sagar Police Station and it was found that in all forty -six votes cast in favour of Shanti Devi were lying in a bundle of votes cast for other side. The petitioner was arrested.

(3.) CONTENTION has been advanced that it is the BDO, Officer -in -charge and the Ex. Engineer whose statements were only recorded at the relevant time and, accordingly, investigation was concluded. As a maker of fact, the petitioner was deployed as an Observer, who had nothing to do with the counting of votes. Further submission is that the persons who were only involved in the process of counting of votes and were instrumental in keeping the bundles of votes in a basket or box have not at all been examined. Not only that, even the counting agents of the respective candidates who fought for Mukhia election were not examined in course of investigation by the Police. Even, the candidate Shanti Devi herself has not been examined by the Police in course of investigation. The petitioner, of course, in the aforesaid situation could be said to have incurred the wrath of Officials i.e. B.D.O. or Police Officer, with whom they had some grudge from before for some reasons.