HEMLAL MAHTHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order dated 3.9.1998, whereby the prayer for discharge of the petitioners was refused by the Court below.

(2.) THE facts, in short, giving rise to this application are that a First Information Report being Peterwar P.S. Case No. 123 of 1988 was registered under Sections 465, 463, 471, 467 and 120 - B. Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and others after the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate sent the complaint petition filed by the complainant, Saroj Kumar Pandey to the police for Instituting a case.

(3.) IT was further alleged in the complaint petition that the complainant carne to know about the existence of the illegal deed in favour of accused Nos. 1 to 5, one week ago only when they received a notice from the office of the Circle Officer regarding a Mutation proceeding in which the accused had applied for mutation of their names. Thereafter the complaint was lodged in the Court, which was sent to the police for instituting FIR, The police after completion of the investigation submitted charge -sheet on the basis of which cognizance was taken on 2.8.1990 by the Sub - Divisional Judicial Magistrate for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 and 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons.