Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25619 of 2010 (2) dt.27-02-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.25619 of 2010 ====================================================== Suresh Maharaj .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 2 27-02-2012 1. The present petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.05.2010 passed in Cr. Revision No. 204 of 2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First Information Report had been instituted at the petitioner’s instance himself and even on the face of it there was no occasion of making him an accused instead, for an offence under [STATUTE] as he could hardly have been expected to have attempted his own murder by shooting himself in the hand. He therefore, submits that at the highest an offence under [STATUTE] might have been alleged but by no stretch of imagination, any offence under [STATUTE] can be said to have been made out. 3. On perusal of Para-7 of the revisional order, however, I find that it is not a case where the petitioner has shot himself in the hand rather the learned Sessions Judge has taken due note of the statement of the witnesses that the petitioner had Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25619 of 2010 (2) dt.27-02-2012 himself come out of the house with loaded pistol in his hand intending to fire with intention to kill the opposite parties and it is only when other people intervened during the ensuing scuffle that the informant accidentally sustained bullet injury in his hand. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he filed a protest petition before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in regard to the matter but the same is still pending and has not yet been disposed of. 5. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of revision nor the order taking cognizance which have been passed after due consideration of materials on record. 6. It will, however, be in the interest of justice to observe that in case the protest petition filed by the petitioner is still pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously after hearing the parties in accordance with law. 7. With the above observations the present petition stands disposed of. Saif/- (Vikash Jain, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 182

Statute Text:
Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code. Giving false information to a public servant in order to cause him to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of any person. Whoever gives to any public servant any information which he knows or believes to be false, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause such public servant: to do or omit anything which such public servant ought not to do or omit if the true state of facts respecting which such information is given were known by him, or to use the lawful power of such public servant to the injury or annoyance of any person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.