IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.10814 of 2008 Wazyool Haque, son of Late Sk. Roje, village Jaisinghpur North, PS Turkaulia, District East Champaran, Motihari – Petitioner. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Binay Kumar Sharma, son of Late Kung Bihari Sharma, Mohalla Agrwa, PS Motihari Sadar, Dist. East Champaran – Opp. Parties. 2 28.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has challenged the order taking cognizance, dated 13.12.2007 for the offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307 and 302 of the Penal Code and 27, Arms Act. The petitioner is the Mukhiya of Jaisinghpur North Gram Panchayat, East Champaran. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner on the alleged date i.e. 12.12.2005 was in the block premises of Turkaulia block where a camp was organized for distribution of Birdha pension under the district administration of East Champaran. In the said camp all the Mukhiyas within Turkaulia block were invited and the petitioner being the Mukhiya of his Gram Panchayat was responsible for identifying the person and the pension was distributed on his identification. The programme started at 11 AM and continued for whole day till 7 PM. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the Investigating Officer has found that the petitioner is not involved in the case which has been supported by the supervision notes of the Dy. 2 Supdt. Of Police and the Inspector General of Police. The documents concerned is not on record obviously because it will have to be produced by the district administration. However, the supervision notes of the Inspector General supervising the case and the Dy. Supdt. Of Police including the Investigating Officer go to suggest that it is a fact that the camp was held. It has also been stated that the proceeding indicates that several officials were present during the distribution of Birdha pension and as such it is submitted that in the peculiar facts of the case the court below ought to satisfy itself regarding the involvement of the petitioner in view of the documentary evidence which goes to suggest that the petitioner was not involved in the occurrence. I, therefore, leave it to the petitioner to produce the documents or to request the court below to call for the documents for the purpose of ascertaining his involvement in the alleged offence at the time of framing of the charge. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)