RAM SHRESTH RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision is directed against an order dated 15-7-86 passed by Shri I.B. Dwivedi, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Samastipur in Tr. No. 1968 of 1986 whereby and whereunder, a charge under Section 409, Indian Penal Code has been framed against the petitioner who was the informant in the case.

(2.) It is not necessary to state the facts of the case in any detail for the disposal of this application. A bare skeleton of them will suffice. On 2nd August, 1972, the present petitioner, who was then posted as Community Project Officer (I. N. D ) Rural Industries Project in the district of Darbbanga, lodged an information with the police stating, inter alia, that opposite party Ram Chandra Deo, Cashier in that project dishonestly misappropriated a sum of Rs. 14000.00 between the period from 3-4-1971 to 1-6-1971 and thereby, rendered himself liable for prosecution under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. After submission of chargesheet by the police, cognizance of the offence under Section 408, I. P.C. was taken and a charge under that section was framed against the said Ramchandra Deo on 27-1-1977 by the then Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur. Thereafter, two witnesses were examined in that case. While the case was proceeding, a petition under Section 319 of the Cr. P.C. was filed by accused opposite party No. 2, Ramchandra Deo, for making the petitioner-informant as an accused and it was rejected by an order dated 11-9-78. Against that order, a Criminal Revision No. 1054 of 1978 was filed before this court and it was disposed of with an observation that if the material come against the petitioner, then it will be open to learned Magistrate to exercise power under Section 219 of the Cr. P.C. In the meantime, the prosecution examined some more witnesses (P. Ws. 3 to 8) including the petitioner. Thereafter, by an order dated 15-9-83 the successor in office of the first Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur on an application filed by the accused Ramchandra Deo-opposite party No. 2 after considering the evidence and other facts and circumstances issued summons to the petitioner. Against that order another Criminal Revision No. 1030 of 1983 was preferred before this Court in which a direction was given to the petitioner to take steps for redressal of his genuine grievance at the stage of framing of charge. This order was passed on 16-2-84. At the time of framing of charge, entire matter was reconsidered and the learned Magistrate after hearing the parties and considering the evidence and the documents available on the record passed the order impugned.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly raised three points viz :