SALKHAN SOREN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.5.2002 whereby and where under the 4th Additional Session. Judge, Giridih, took cognizance of the offence under Sections 147, 341, 302/149 and 120-B of the Indian Penal code and also summoned the petitioner to face trial while exercising the power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') in Sessions Trial No. 249 of 2001.

(2.) First Information Report was lodged by the choukidar stating therein that he heard some rumour in the village that one person is being beaten by adivasies and on this information he went to the village and found that 500 to 600 adivasies beating a person with danda. He also tried to pacify the matter but they did not listen to him and thereafter he was going to the police station when he found the said person dead at the spot The first information report was lodged against unknown. The choukidar also came to know from the villagers that one Slastina Soren was residing at Giridih and she was attending the Institute for learning Typewriting for the last six months when she came in contact with one Juli Singh who was in love with her and there was also in illicit relation between them. On 31.5.1998 when Juli Singh tried to take Slastina Soren from her house forcibly then the villagers after seeing rushed to the spot and assaulted Juli Singh as a result of which Juli Singh died.

(3.) The police investigated into the case and submitted charge-sheet against the accused-persons but the petitioner was not named in the charge-sheet. The Investigating Officer also submitted supplementary charge-sheet dated 30.4.1999 but the petitioner was not named in the said charge-sheet also. Accordingly, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against the accused-persons named in the charge-sheet. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and after framing charge, three witnesses were examined in the trial Court. The trial Court after perusing the evidence collected during trial passed the order impugned summoning the petitioner to face the trial, hence, this application.