Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.32200 of 2011 ====================================================== Sugrim Prasad @ Sugriv Sah @ Sugrim Sah S/o Late Bachu Sah, Resident of Village-Singhia Gumati, P.S.-Banjaria, Distt.-East Champaran at Motihari. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Lalan Sah S/o Bhairav Sah. 3. Umesh Kumar Sah S/o Bhairav Sah. 4. Bhairav Sah S/o Late Jogi Sah. All Resident of Village-Pipra, P.S.-Pipra, Distt.-East Champaran at Motihari. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 7 19-06-2012 Heard Dr. Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party Nos. 2, 3 & 4. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed for quashing of an order dated 9.5.2011 passed by Sri R.K.Tiwari, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Motihari, in Enquiry No. 17 of 2010, arising out of Protest-cum- Complaint Case No. C-198 of 2009 and for issuance of direction to the learned Magistrate for issuance of summons against the accused persons, named in the Complaint Petition. Subsequently, by filing a Supplementary Affidavit on 2.5.2012, the petitioner has confined his prayer for quashing of the order dated 9.5.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Motihari in Enquiry No. 17 of 2010. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32200 of 2011 (7) dt.19-06-2012 2 Initially, on written report, submitted by the petitioner before the police, an F.I.R., vide Pipra P.S. Case No. 115 of 2008, was registered on 20.8.2008 for the offence under [STATUTE] against the Opposite Party Nos. 3 & 4. The police after investigation found the case as not true, and as such, final report was submitted. In the meanwhile, protest petition was filed by the informant, who is petitioner before this Court and protest petition was treated as complaint petition. During inquiry, the impugned order i.e. order dated 9.5.2011, was passed by the learned Magistrate, granting liberty to the petitioner to produce evidence of the Doctor. Learned Magistrate had ordered the complainant to bring on record medical evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if there is contradiction in between the ocular evidence and medical evidence, the ocular evidence cannot be ignored, and only on the basis of ocular evidence, case can proceed. He submits that during inquiry, the complainant and other four witnesses were examined and there were sufficient materials on record for showing prima-facie case. Instead of taking cognizance, learned Magistrate has unwarrantedly passed impugned order, which was required to be interfered with. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2 has vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner. It was also submitted that firstly during investigation the allegation was not found true and as such, police had submitted final report and since till date no specific material Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.32200 of 2011 (7) dt.19-06-2012 3 was brought on record during the enquiry on protest-cum-complaint petition, the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order, directing the complainant to bring on record certain medical evidence. He further submits that the impugned order is not a final order and this order was passed during the enquiry and as such, the order may not be interfered with at this stage. The Court is of the opinion that since order of the cognizance in this case has not been passed and as such at this stage, it would not be appropriate to interfere with the enquiry. However; keeping in view the fact that protest-cum-complainant was filed in the year 2009 and the case is at the stage of enquiry, it is desirable to direct the court below to conclude the enquiry, preferably, within a period of three months, after the receipt of the copy of this order. The petition stands disposed of. This order may be communicated through Fax on cost being deposited by the petitioner. Anay (Rakesh Kumar, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 302

Statute Text:
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Murder. Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.