JITENDRA KUMAR @ JITENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, Jitendra Kumar has challenged the order dtd. 9/4/2015 passed by learned CJM, Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. case no.154/2013 whereby and whereunder he along with others has been summoned to face trial for an offence punishable under Ss. 302, 325, 326, 331, 352, 34 of the IPC coupled with subsequent prosecution arisen therefrom under Sessions Trial No.280 of 2016 pending before First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Jamui for want of prosecution in accordance with sec. 197 of the Cr.P.C., 1973

(2.) Arvind Kumar Mishra, Jailor, Jamui filed written report on 1/7/2013 disclosing therein that accused Munna Singh being under custody in connection with Jamui P.S. Case no.95/2013 was taken on police remand and during course thereof, S.I. of Town P.S. namely Jitendra Kumar, S.I. of Giddaur P.S. Satyabart Bharti brutally assaulted him as disclosed by aforesaid custodial accused Munna Singh to other custodial accused. It has further been averred that aforesaid custodial accused Munna Singh died at PMCH during course of treatment.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid written report, Jamui P.s. Case No.154/2013 has been registered against so many persons and after completing investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against Satyabart Bharti, Jitendra Kumar keeping investigation pending against others. It is further evident that petitioner Jitendra Kumar Singh is taking tooth to nail in order to linger the proceeding and for that, each and every opportunity is being availed for the aforesaid purpose. From the order sheet it is evident that the trial has been taken cared of by the High Court whereunder, time schedule has been given to the learned lower court to complete the trial, and under the aforesaid direction, the learned lower court came up to the stage of argument, argument of prosecution has completed, argument of defence also begun then thereafter a petition has been filed at the end of the petitioner to exonerate as, the proceeding has commenced without sanction as required under sec. 197 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 in the background of the fact that petitioner happens to be public servant as defined under Sec. 21 of the IPC and, the offence so alleged has been committed during due discharge of his official duty.