IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.55593 of 2007 1. PRAMODJI @ PRAMOD BARNWAL Son of Late Chandrika Prasad Barnwal. 2. Guddu Barnwal. 3. Bijay Baranwal. Both sons of Late Lakshman Prasad Barnwal. 4. Sri Narayan Barnwal @ Narayan Pd. Barnwal son of late Mohan Barnwal. 5. Saheb Chawdl Wala son of Late Munilal Sah 6. Om Prakash Barnwal son of Sheoji Barnwal 7. Pintoo Barnwal @ Pintoo Kr. Barnwal Son of Om Prakash Barnwal. All resident of Mohalla Meen Bazar, Bettiah, Post Office + Police Station- Bettiah, District West Champaran. . . . . Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Kashi Nath Pandey, Son of Late Ramchhabila Pandey, Resident of Mohalla- Peoni Bag, Police Station- Bettiah, District- West Champaran. . . . . . Opposite Parties. For the Petitioners : Mr. Pathak Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Smt. Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P. ----------- 2/ 04.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners pray for quashing the order dated 31.10.2007 passed in Complaint case no. 2536 C of 2003 whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah took cognizance for the offences under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and summoned the accused / petitioners to face trial. Learned counsel submits that the instant complaint was filed on 01.10.2003 and six days prior on 25.09.2003 the Sub-Inspector of Police, Bettiah Town P.S. has also instituted Bettiah Town P.S. case no. 356 of 2002 in respect of the alleged murder of the complainant’s son namely Manish Kumar Pandey @ Saheb. Learned counsel submits that the police after investigation submitted final form in the aforesaid case. He further submitted that the police in the First Information Report stated that the deceased used to ask money from the shopkeepers and in course of Mar-pit, he died. Learned - 2 - counsel further submits that Manish Kumar Pandey @ Saheb, the deceased, had gone to the shop and was requested to give money and on request, his father on 30.06.2002 had even filed an informatory petition before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran against him. As far as, the instant complaint case is concerned, it would appear that complainant alleged that the witnesses informed him that all the accused persons and two others assaulted his son by means of iron rod and lathi on account of which he died instantly. The petitioners submit that now compromise petition has been filed and it is the witnesses and not the informant, who want to pursue the case, as they want to extort money from these accused persons, who are the ordinary shopkeepers. It would appear from the order dated 01.10.2007 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah that the four witnesses examined during enquiry lent support to the prosecution case. It would also appear that the Magistrate has passed the impugned order in terms of Sub-section 3 of Section 210 of Cr.P.C. Having heard the counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to quash the order taking cognizance. However, it will be open to the petitioners to take all these points at the time of framing of charge without prejudice. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)