RAKESHKUMAR CHOUDHRY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 16th July, 2004, passed in Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2002, whereby and whereunder, the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, while passed the order, impleading the petitioner as an accused in the above-noted case under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has ordered him to face trial along with the other accused and has further issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against him for his appearance.

(2.) Brief fact of the case is that an F.I.R. was instituted on the basis of the Fard-beyan of one Prabhu Bedia dated 14th May, 2001, wherein the informant (Prabhu Bedia) alleged that his son Ram Charan Bedia was working as Security Guard-cum-Driver under Rakesh Choudhary, Builder, D. V. Palace, Ranchi and along with him Rajesh Bedia alias Rashoraj Bedia, Jitu Bedia, Haricharan Bedia and Ajay Karmali were/are also working as Security Guard-cum-Driver. It has been alleged that one Rati Kant Pahan, who was earlier working with Rakesh Choudhary, had left the job about a month before and Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia, who was another employee, had also left the job 2 to 4 days back. Rati Kant Pahan had told Chatrapati Sahi about 25 days back that Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia had asked him to commit murder of Ram Charan Bedia, Sadhu Bedia and Ratan Bedia to which he (Rati Kant Pahan) did not agree and for the said reason he got him removed from service. In the F.I.R. it has been further alleged that Ram Charan Bedia was missing since 28th April, 2001 when he had gone along with Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia. Later on, his dead body was recovered near Sahubera. The informant raised suspicion that his son was murdered by Shankar alias Chaita, Rakesh Choudhary, Kaleshwar Bedia and Suraj Bedia. Accordingly, First Information Report was lodged at Sikidiri Police Station against four persons wherein, the petitioner was also named as an accused. After investigation, police submitted charge-sheet only against Chaita Bedia. The police did not sent-up other three persons for trail, who were named in the First Information Report, including the petitioner. No charge-sheet was submitted against those three, including the petitioner.

(3.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the learned Court below after submission of the charge-sheet and final report, submitted in favour of the petitioner, took cognizance of the offence under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code only against Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia vide order dated 17th October, 2001 and transferred the case to the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. The learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, thereafter, committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial of Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia only. During trial, altogether 13 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. After closure of evidence, statement of accused Chaita Bedia alias Shankar Bedia was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was also heard on merit and was fixed for judgment.