BIRSINGH MUNDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent State and Mr. Nitish Krishna, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant/ O.P.No.2. Mr. Nanda, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.3 have left for their heavenly abode and that is why he is not pressing the instant petition so far petitioner nos.1 and 3 are concerned and confines his prayer with regard to petitioner nos.2, 4 to 7.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing of the order taking cognizance dtd. 19/8/2010 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Khunti in G.R. Case No.205 of 2004(s) arising out of Arki P.S.Case No.18 of 2004 as well as entire criminal proceeding arising thereof registered for the offence under Sec. 147, 148, 149, 302 of the I.P.C and Sec. 17 of the C.L.A Act, pending in the court of learned SDJM, at Khunti.

(3.) The prosecution case was lodged alleging therein that the case is based on ferdbeyan of one Fagu Munda alleging therein that he has three sons namely Sanika Munda, Basu Munda and Sukhram Munda however Sanika Munda was staying at Revta. It is further stated that on 9./10/5/2004 his son Sanika Munda went to watch Chhau Dance at Village Barigada and in the meantime Kumdan Pahan along with his group came and ordered to sit all the person and further stated that if any one tried to move then he will be killed. He further stated that he will kill Sanika Munda of village Aradih. It is further stated that the aforesaid information was disclosed to the informant by one Sathe Munda and accordingly he went to the place of occurrence and found dead body of his son and one another namely Gadi Munda. It is further alleged that there is a land dispute for about 300 acre 90 dismil of land between all the accused persons named in the FIR and the informant party. There was a case decreed in favour of the informant also but the accused persons have threatened him that they will kill someone of his family with the help of some other person. It is further alleged that the accused persons have relationship with MCC Area Commander Kundan Pahan and he was used to visit to them for the purpose of food and therefore the informant raised suspicion that his son may be killed by accused nos.4 to 17 with the help of Kundan Pahan in course of watching Chhau Dance and as such the present FIR was registered. Mr. Nanda, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that Kundan Pahan is the main accused and against him there are several cases. He submits that the entire villagers of Village Baligarha in the district of Khunti have been made accused in the case. He submits that the petitioners are villagers of that village and they have been unnecessarily made accused in the present case. He further submits that however the police has investigated the matter and these petitioners have not been sent up for trial. However, the learned court has taken cognizance against these petitioners which is against the mandate of law. He submits that there is nothing disclosed in the order taking cognizance as to what are the materials came against the petitioners. Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent State submits that counter affidavit has been filed. He submits that that except repetition of names of these petitioners, nothing has come in the present petition during the course of investigation and hence finding the case of lack of evidence against the present petitioners, report of investigation has been submitted.