CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6189 OF 2001 In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ------------ GANESH SINGH, Son of Late Bal Kishun Singh, resident of Mohalla- Jyoti Nagar, Sadipur, P.S. Kotwali, District-Munger ----------------------- Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---- Opp.Party. ----------- For the Petitioner: Sri Ashwini Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Sri Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P. ----------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J. The petitioner, who was the Head Clerk in the State Bank of India, Munger ,while pursuing a criminal case being an accused since 1977, has approached this Court with a prayer to quash an order dated 2.2.2001,whereby his petition for closing the case was rejected. By order dated 2.2.2001, Sri S.Akhtar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger has rejected the petition for closing the case in G.R.No. 1314 of 1977 arising out of Munger Town P.S. Case No.26 dated 12.9.1977. 2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioner was a Head Clerk in the State Bank of India, Munger and on a particular date, he was working as Sub-Accountant i.e. on 7.7.1977.On the date one Sri S.P.Singh claiming to be proprietorof M/S India Foils Limited approached the Bank for opening an account. He was introduced by one of the Account-holder of the Bank and his account was opened in the Bank. Thereafter a cheque for an 2 amount of Rs.81,981.28 was presented, which was subsequently credited by Grindlay’s Bank, Calcutta. It was suspected that said S.P.Singh was a fictitious person and, as such, an F.I.R. was lodged, in which the petitioner was also made one of the accused along with other officials of the State Bank of India. Despite the fact that F.I.R. was lodged in the year 1977, the investigation was kept pending for several years and finally on 11.3.1984, chargesheet was submitted in the case and petitioner along with others were forwarded to face trial. Immediately after noticing the fact that the petitioner was made accused, he filed a petition for anticipatory bail, which was allowed on 10.4.1978 and thereafter on 15.4.1978 he appeared before the court below. It was submitted by Sri Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had not put any hindrance in the case and he was regularly participated in the proceeding. In the case even after submission of the chargesheet in the year 1984, the matter remained pending for several years. Discharge petition filed by the petitioner was rejected on 29.5.1999, even then it consumed more than three years for framing of the charge and charge could be framed on 8.4.1994. Sri Ashwini Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that even though charge was framed on 8.4.1994, the prosecution did not take any step to produce any witness till date of filing of the petition by the petitioner for closing the case. The said petition was rejected on 2.2.2001 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger. 3 3. Aggrieved with the order dated 2.2.2001 the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition, which was admitted on 28.11.2001. While admitting, this Court directed that during the pendency of this application further proceeding in G.R. No.1314 of 1977 pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger shall remain stayed. This Court also called for lower court record, which has been received. 4. Sri Ashwini Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that keeping in view the fact that in the present case, an F.I.R. was lodged in the year 1977 and case remained pending till date even without examination of any witness allowing further prosecution to proceed before the court below will amount to abuse of the process of the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that without any material, the petitioner was chargesheeted. On the aforesaid ground, it has been prayed to quash the entire prosecution so far as the petitioner is concerned. 5. Sri Choubey Jawahar, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the prayer of the petitioner. 6. Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also examined the materials available on record. On the basis of materials available on record, this Court is of the opinion that about after 33 years from the date of occurrence, it would not 4 be appropriate to direct the petitioner to participate in the proceeding in Munger Town P.S. Case No.26 dated 12.9.1977 before the Court below . The Court is satisfied that the process of court has already been abused for quite a long time and, as such, this is a fit case to interfere with the proceeding . 7. Accordingly, the prosecution so far as the petitioner is concerned in G.R. No.1314 of 1977 arising out of Munger Town P.S. Case No.26 dated 12.9.1977 pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger is hereby set aside and the petition stands allowed. Patna High Court,Patna Dated : the 17th August,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/ N.A.F.R. ( Rakesh Kumar, J )