SURESH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of the order dated 9-4-1992 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi whereby he amalgamated Complaint Case No. C1/224/90 with the case instituted on police report being Belsand P.S. Case No. 21/90.

(2.) It appears that in respect to an occurrence dated 16-4-1990, a case under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered in Police Station Belsand vide F.I.R. No. 21 of the even date. This case was registered against two named accused, namely, Ram Naresh Prasad and Rakesh Prasad and some other unknown accused. In respect to the same occurrence Anup Paswan, O.P. No. 2, filed a criminal complaint against seven persons by name including the two petitioners herein. It appears that the proceeding in the complaint was stayed during the pendency of the investigation as required by sub-section (1) of Section 210 Cr. P.C. After completion of investigation the police submitted charge sheet against six persons. It may be noticed that the petitioners were neither named as accused in the F.I.R. nor their name figured as accused in the charge sheet submitted by the police under Section 173 Cr. P.C. After the charge sheet was filed, the Chief Judicial Magistrate vide impugned order amalgamated both the cases.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that since the petitioners, who were accused in the complaint case, did not figure as accused in the charge sheet submitted by the police, the complaint case could not have been amalgamated with the police case in view of sub-section (3) of Section 210 Cr. P.C. In support of this contention learned counsel relied upon a case reported in 1989 Suppl (2) S.C.C. 648 (Manikandan v. Pandian & ors.). The Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State in all fairness admitted the aforesaid legal proposition.