Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.115 of 2008 ====================================================== Ganga Prasad Singh son of late Ramashray Prasad Singh, resident of village-Tehgraha, P.S.-Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State of Bihar 2.The Commissioner, Home Department, Bihar, Patna 3.The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna 4.The Deputy Inspector General, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur 5.The Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur 6.The Officer-in-Charge of Ahiyapur P.S., District- Muzaffarpur 7.Priti Singh wife of Munna Singh, daughter of Rajeev Kishore Singh, Bazar Samiti, P.S.-Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12 06-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner is to quash the first information report of Ahiyapur (Muzaffarpur) P.S. Case No.168 of 2007 registered under [STATUTE] and its entire investigation as the case has been filed by respondent no.7 maliciously. For the occurrence which took place on 2.11.2006, initially a complaint was filed on 23.3.2007 which was referred to the police on 24.4.2007 under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur for investigation pursuant to which Ahiyapur (Muzaffarpur) P.S. Case No.168 of 2007 was Patna High Court CR. WJC No.115 of 2008 (12) dt.06-09-2012 2 registered on 29.4.2007. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that with respect to death of the complainant’s/informant’s husband initially a U.D. case being Ahiyapur U.D. Case No.31 of 2006 dated 3.11.2006 was registered on the basis of fardbeyan given by one Binor Kumar Singh, the brother of the deceased and son of the petitioner. The deceased is none else but son of the petitioner. The fardbeyan given by the aforesaid Binod Kumar Singh was duly recorded by one Jagdish Singh, an A.S.I. of Ahiyapur Police Station. The father of the informant, namely, Rajiv Kishore Singh is a witness to the U.D. Case. Learned senior counsel further submits that the present case has belatedly been instituted by the informant maliciously in order to black-mail the petitioner in order to grab the joint family property. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the investigating agency has no malice towards any party. The police is investigating the case impartially and a report in terms of section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure would be filed on the basis of materials collected in course of investigation. It is also contended on behalf of the State that chemical report upon examination of visera has already been Patna High Court CR. WJC No.115 of 2008 (12) dt.06-09-2012 3 received from the Forensic Science Laboratory. Be that as it may, since the first information report discloses commission of a cognizable offence, it would not be prudent for this court to jump to any conclusion. I am not inclined to quash the first information report in question. However, it is expected that the investigating agency would submit its report on the basis of outcome of the investigation expeditiously. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Md.S./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 328

Statute Text:
Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code. Administering stupefying drug with intent to cause hurt, etc. Whoever administers to or causes to be taken by any person any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, or other thing with intent to cause hurt to such person, or with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an offence or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.