Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.4233 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Pintu Mandal S/O Sri Naresh Mandal Resident Of Village- Hathiya Darha, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka 2. Bambam Kumar @ Bairam Mandal S/O Sri Naresh Mandal Resident Of Village- Hathiya Darha, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka 3. Hema Devi W/O Sri Binod Mandal Resident Of Village- Gerua, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka 4. Gabbar Mandal @ Dharmbir Mandal S/O Daya Ram Mandal Resident Of Village- Birajpur, P.S.- Sangrampur, District- Munger .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Gore Lal Mandal S/O Late Kameshwar Mandal Resident Of Village- Tulsipur, P.S.- Haweli Kharagpur, District- Munger .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kr. Anand, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ms. Indu Kumri Shrivas , Addl. P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA) 3 31-01-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public prosecutor appearing for the State. The petitioners have filed the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure questioning the validity and correctness of the order dated 26.08.2011 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Belhar P.S. Case No. 53 of 2011 whereby cognizance under [STATUTE] and some other allied offences has been taken against the accused persons including the petitioners. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that as a matter of fact there is no legal material to show direct involvement of the petitioners in Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4233 of 2012 (3) dt.31-01-2012 2 / 2 2 commission of the crime in question. It is further highlighted that the petitioners are distantly related to the husband of the deceased and further the police has not submitted charge sheet against them. Therefore, order taking cognizance is bad in law. After having heard the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record, I am afraid, the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners are misconceived. It is well settled that a Magistrate can always disagree with the police report and can take cognizance against the accused persons on the basis of materials available on the record. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 26.08.2011 cannot be faulted on that ground. Further under the mandate of Section 190 Cr. P. C. the cognizance is taken of an offence and not against the offenders. It is well settled that the sufficiency of the material or otherwise against a particular accused can be always raised at the time of framing of charge. In view of the submission raised on behalf of the petitioners, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioners may be given liberty to raise all the issues at the time of framing of charge against them. It is ordered accordingly. This application stands disposed of with a liberty aforesaid. BTiwary/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 201

Statute Text:
Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Causing disappearance of evidence of an offence committed, or giving false information touching it to screen the offender, If a capital offence. Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false; if a capital offence — shall, if the offence which he knows or believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with imprisonment for life — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with less than ten years imprisonment — and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any term not extending to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both.