Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2011 (4) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11536 of 2011 ====================================================== Kameshwar Rai, son of late Mishri Rai, resident of Mohalla-Lakshmipur, Ward No.11, P.S. Madhepura, District- Madhepura. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Special Secretary, Chief Minister, Bihar 3. The District Magistrate, Madhepura 4. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga Range. 6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Koshi Division, Saharsa 7. The Superintendent of Police, Madhepura. 8. The Inspector of Police, Madhepura 9. The I/O Madhepura Police Station, District- Madhepura 10. The S.D.P.O., Madhepura, District- Madhepura 11. The A.S.I., Madhepura Police Station, District- Madhepura ----- Opposite Ist Party. 12. Shanti Devi, wife of Maheshwar Kamat 13. Maheshwar Kamat, son of late Siya Kamat. 14. Dinesh Kamat 15. Ramesh Kamat 16. Ganesh Kamat 17. Kartik Kamat, sons of Maheshwar Kamat, all resident of Village- Ward No. 16, Lakshmipur, P.S. Madhepura, District-Madhepura. Opposite 2nd Party. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Jha, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY CAV ORDER 4 22.8.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. In this case the petitioner is challenging the order dated 20.1.2010, passed in Criminal Revision No. 57 of 2008 by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Madhepura whereby and whereunder he has set aside the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2011 (4) order dated 18.3.2006 passed in Complaint Case No.591 of 2006 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura whereby he has referred the matter to the concerned police station for fresh investigation. 3. From the record it appears that the petitioner has instituted a case vide Mdhepura P.S. Case No. 18 of 2006 for the offences under [STATUTE] . Allegation has been made that the informant is in possession of the land appertaining to Jamabandi No. 1836. It has been alleged that the accused persons tried to disturb the possession and When it was objected, allegation has been made that the accused persons gave blow by spade but could escape. It has been further alleged that the accused persons wanted to grab his property and for that they have created a false and fabricated rent receipt of dispute land. It has been further alleged that Shanti Devi used to threaten that she would trap the petitioner in a false rape case. The case was investigated by the police and after investigation a final form was submitted showing the case to be a civil nature between the parties. 4. A protest petition was filed on behalf of the informant with the allegation that the police did not investigate the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2011 (4) case in a proper angle but under the influence of the Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga Range although there are sufficient materials available on record against the accused persons but submitted the final form. It also appears from the record that protest petition was filed by the informant while the case was under investigation and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura accepted the final form and after hearing the parties directed the protest petition to be registered as complaint petition. On 22.9.2006 protest petition was registered as complaint petition bearing Complaint Case No. 591 of 2006 and the case was fixed for solemn affirmation of the informant/complainant. While the matter was pending for solemn affirmation the petitioner filed a criminal revision before the sessions court vide Criminal Revision No. 125 of 2006 against the order dated 13.9.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate accepting the final form but it appears that the aforesaid criminal revision application resulted in dismissal. 5. It further appears that the petitioner has filed a criminal writ before this Court vide Cr.W.J.C. No. 324 of 2007 and this Court vide order dated 22.1.2008 has passed Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2011 (4) the following order: “This grievance can be taken care of by the learned Magistrate if the petitioner approaches the learned Magistrate by filing protest-cum-complaint and persuade the learned Magistrate concerned to issue appropriate direction and with this observation, this application is disposed of, however, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the State Government against the malicious conduct of respondent no.5 in the light of Annexures 9 and 10 appended with the rejoinder affidavit.” 6. When the order of this Court was placed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, he vide order dated 18.3.2006 has passed the order for fresh investigation. 7. The aforesaid order was challenged by the opposite party vide Criminal Revision No. 57 of 2008 and the revisional court by the impugned order set aside the order dated 18.3.2008 and the sessions court was of the opinion that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has fallen in error in giving direction for fresh investigation. The learned Sessions Judge is of the view that the Chief Judicial Magistrate should have made an enquiry on protest petition as the sessions court was of the view that when the complaint was in existence and case is pending for solemn affirmation of the complainant/informant then he should have acted in accordance with law as provided under Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2011 (4) section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as „the Code‟) but he has rejected the revision petition on he ground of locus standi. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order of sessions c

Applicable IPC Section: 429

Statute Text:
Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code. Mischief by killing poisoning maiming or rendering useless any elephant, camel, horse, etc., whatever may be its value or any other animal of the value of 50 rupees or upwards. Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, of any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.