NAQUEEB KHAN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Calling in question, the legal validity of the order dated 26.03.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Hazaribagh in S.T. No. 285 of 2008 whereby and where under the petition filed by the five petitioners for their discharge under Sec. 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code"), has been rejected.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts, which are necessary to be stated, are that on the basis of the statement made by one Anil Kumar Pandey (since deceased) recorded by S.I. of Chauparan P.S. at Primary Health Centre, Chauparan P.S. Case no. 26 of 2001, was instituted on 07.02.2001 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 307, 506/ 379 and other provisions of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sec. 27 of Arms Act but as the informant died during treatment, Sec. 302 of I.P.C. was subsequently added vide order dated 08.02.2001, with the allegation that the informant was the Manager-cum-caretaker of Siyarkoni Bungalow and he used to visit the said bungalow in the morning, noon and in the evening and besides one Chowkidar to look after the bungalow, Chhedi Singh, Narayan Pandey and Bablu Pandey were also engaged to take care of other works. On 07.02.2001 at about 9.00 a.m. when the informant along with one Gautam Mukherjee reached at the Bungalow, 10 to 15 persons armed with deadly weapon i.e. lathi, iron rod, sword and fire arms trespassed in the bungalow. Among them the informant identified all the five petitioners and claimed to identify other persons also. One of them Rayeesh Khan was holding double barrel gun, other persons Babu Khan, Sahnawaj and Naqueeb were holding sword and other persons were holding lathi and they started abusing the informant. Rayees Khan opened three fires from his gun. Seeing the incidence, Chowkidar anyhow fled away but all other miscreants surrounded the informant and Gautam Mukherjee and assaulted them with an intention to commit their murder. The informant sustained several injuries and Gautam Mukherjee also received injuries. The left leg of the informant was broken down. It is also alleged that Babu Khan threatened them with dire consequence and thereafter they all fled away. The intention of the petitioners was to forcefully grab the said bungalow. The Investigating Officer after due investigation, submitted the charge sheet against the petitioners and other accused persons. Subsequently, the investigation was handed over to Crime Investigation Department (C.I.D.) and after completion of investigation, the C.I.D. also found the allegations against the petitioners and other accused persons as true and supported the earlier charge sheet submitted by the police.

(3.) After commitment of the case when the trial was fixed for framing of charge, a petition under Sec. 227 of the Code was filed by the present petitioners for their discharge but the court below by the order impugned dated 26.03.2015 dismissed the petition. Hence, this revision.