JHINGAN PRASAD KUSHWAHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 22.5.1998 passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 256/97 by which he has cancelled the bail granted to the petitioners on 5.8.1997 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari in Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 112/97 under Secs. 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Secs. 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief is that one Devendra Kumar Singh filed complaint case No. 328/97 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate against the petitioners and one Narain Prasad Kushwaha and the said complaint petition was forwarded to the police under Sec. 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for instituting a case and making investigation thereof and accordingly, Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 112 of 1997. was instituted under the aforementioned sections of the Indian Penal Code and Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioners surrendered before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari and prayed for grant of bail. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after considering the entire facts of the case granted bail to the petitioners by his order dated 5.8.1997 and on furnishing bail bonds the petitioners were released.

(3.) IT appears that within a week the informant filed the petition before the Sessions Judge, Motihari for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioners by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 5.8.1997. The grounds stated in the petition for cancellation of bail is that there was no discrepancy between the first information report and the complaint and that the accused Narain Prasad Kushwaha made a statement under Sec. 164 of the Code of Criminal. Procedure accepting his role and further that the petitioners threatened the informant that they would realise from him the expenses incurred in getting bail and that the petitioner No. l threatened the informant on 6.8.1997 and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 threatened him on 7.8.1997 and further that the bail was granted for extraneous reasons. The learned Sessions Judge issued notice to the petitioners to show cause as to why the prayer for cancellation of bail should not be allowed. In response to the said notice the petitioners appeared and filed their show cause denying and disputing the allegations made by the informant. In the meantime cancellation application was transferred to the Court of 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, who after hearing the parties on several dates referred the matter to the Sub -divisional Judicial Magistrate, Incharge for making inquiry into the matter and directed for submission of report before 31.3.1998. It appears that the learned Magistrate submitted his report after making necessary inquiry and according to the report of the Magistrate the allegations have been made by the informant only for the purpose of cancellation of bail. The 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, however, after hearing the parties passed the impugned order and cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.