BACHHA SAH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.10.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in C.G.S. No.49 of 2015 corresponding to Trial No.2181 of 2016 by which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under section 212 of the Cr.P.C., 1973

(3.) The petitioner had instituted Garkha P.S. Case No.158 of 2014 which was registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307 and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the I.P.C.'). The allegation in the FIR was that on 10.08.2014 while the petitioner was sitting at his door five persons, namely, Pradeep Kumar, Madan Mohan Prasad, Ritesh Kumar, Ashok Prasad and Lallan Prasad came there and started abusing one Satyendra Kumar Singh to which he objected. In the meantime, all the accused persons started quarreling with him. They abused him and, on objection, Ritesh Kumar took out dagger from his pocket and handed over the same to Pradeep Kumar, who assaulted with dagger in the left side of the petitioner's abdomen. After investigation of the case, the police found the allegation to be true against one Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Munna Singh and submitted charge-sheet against him and continued with investigation in respect of other accused persons. After taking cognizance of the offence, the case of Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Munna Singh was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. In course of trial five witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution including the petitioner. After recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 and closure of the case, the case was fixed for hearing and, after hearing the parties, the trial court acquitted the accused giving him benefit of doubt vide judgment dated 14.08.2015. While recording the aforesaid judgment, the trial court recorded that the informant of the case was a Choukidar and he had deliberately not supported the prosecution case as a result of which the court was compelled to record the judgment of acquittal. The trial court recorded that being a government servant, the informant had tried to ensure acquittal of an accused in a criminal case which warranted his prosecution under section 212 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 Hence, it sent a copy of the judgment to the District Magistrate, Saran, Chapra for filing a complaint under section 212 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 against the informant of the case. On the recommendation made by the trial court, no action was taken by the District Magistrate. However, the Additional Sessions Judge himself sent a written complaint in this regard to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran, Chapra vide his letter no.242 dated 26.08.2015 pursuant to which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran, Chapra took cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 212 of the I.P.C. against the petitioner.