BISHWAJIT MUKHERJEE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. No one appears for the O.P. No.2 in spite of repeated calls, even though the, O.P. No.2 has appeared through advocate in this case an earlier occasion also no one had appeared in spite of repeated calls.

(2.) IN this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with C/1 Case No. 154 of 1996 including the order dated 22.7.2000 passed by Sri M. K. Srivastav, learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, whereby, the petition filed under Sections 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner was rejected by the Court below.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Court below cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, inasmuch as, there is no allegation against the petitioner in the entire complaint petition and even in the evidence of the witnesses including the complainant, who were examined by the court below before charge, there is no material against the petitioner, except that he is an attesting witness to the agreement between the accused persons and the complainant, as well as, he had also signed the money receipts issued by the accused persons as a witness. Learned counsel has submitted that only on that basis the petitioner cannot be said to be a beneficiary and he cannot be made accused in this case and, accordingly, he has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Court cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.