LAL MANOJ NATH SAHDEO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT criminal revision is directed against the order impugned dated 12.2.2008, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga by which petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for his discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the alleged offence under Sections 384/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 17(2) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1908 was rejected in Senha P.S. Case No.23 of 2007, corresponding to G.R. Case No.120 of 2007.

(2.) PROSECUTION story, in short, was that while the informant -police officer was going with the raiding party to arrest certain extremists and was also interrogating several villagers of the different villages on 10.3.2007, he found a motorcycle coming without registration number on the registration plate. The rider and the pillion having seen the police party started fleeing away, leaving the motorcycle there. However, on suspicion they were apprehended, who disclosed their names Umesh Hazam and Keshav Yadav. It was disclosed by Keshav Yadav that he was going to call on his cousin Nakul Yadav @ Arjun Yadav @ Jawahar Yadav, Zonal Commander of M.C.C. staying at village Uperturiyadih as he had assured him to help with money in the marriage of his daughter. Further disclosure was made that one Surendra Yadav was also coming along with other four persons in different motorcycles, who were also going to meet Nakul Yadav. Meanwhile, three motorcycles were seen coming and police intercepted. Surendra Yadav was also one of them as pillion rider on a motorcycle, which was driven by one Sanjay Prasad. It was alleged that in the second motorcycle, petitioner Lal Manoj Nath Sahdeo was sitting with Vijay Yadav and the rider of the third motorcycle was Uday Shankar Kuwar without pillion. It was alleged that on search, a diary containing telephone No.9430392218 of Nakul Yadav was recovered from the pocket of Vijay Yadav. It was further alleged that from the pocket of the petitioner, one cell phone of Samsung Company vide No.9430365418 was recovered. Besides, other incriminating articles, cash, cell phones were recovered from the other motorcycles. These persons including the petitioner admitted before the police that they were going to call on Nakul Yadav, Zonal Commander of the M.C.C. to give levy. Accused persons including the petitioner were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation was initiated and the police submitted chargesheet against all the accused persons under Sections 384/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 17(2) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1908.

(3.) LEARNED counsel pointed out that if at all there was admission that some of the riders were going to call on the extremist Nakul Yadav and sum of Rs.50,000/ -and 47,500/ -were recovered from the possession of some of the accused, recovery was not made from the possession of the petitioner and it was the confessional statement of the co -accused, which was not relevant against the petitioner.