IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.380 of 2009 Sultan Khan son of Dukhi Khan, resident of Village- Kudra, Police Station- Kudra, District- Kaimur at Bhabua ……. Petitioner Versus 1.The State Of Bihar through the Home Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 2.The Superintendent of Police, District- Kaimur at Bhabua 3.The Director, Central Bureau, Narcotic, Lucknow (State of Uttar Pradesh) 4.Sub-Inspector-cum-Investigating Officer, Central Bureau, Narcotic, Lucknow(U.P.) …… Respondents ----------- 2. 21/05/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In this writ application, petitioner claims that he has become victim of mistaken identity and falsehood played by actual accused of C.B.N.Case No.7 of 1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the actual accused of the said case is one Kutubuddin Khan son of Nizamuddin Khan. However, after arrest, in some documents he has mentioned his alias name as Sultan @ Kutubuddin Khan son of Dukhi @ Nizamuddin. Hence processes have been issued against the petitioner, although petitioner is no way concerned with the said case. He points out that by order dated - 2 - 7.8.1998, learned Sessions Judge, on a petition filed by the petitioner, called for a report from the Investigating Officer. He also submits that the Investigating Officer is of U.P. and he has completed the investigation and submitted his report. He has not responded to the order of learned Sessions Judge and therefore, in absence of any clarification of the matter, the court is proceeding with the case against this petitioner. He also points out order dated 18.12.2008 passed by the 1st Additional sessions Judge, Bhabua in Trial No.81 of 2000 by which processes have been issued against the petitioner. It appears that the case is now pending with the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhabua at the trial stage. Since the petitioner has been claiming mistake of identity since 1998 itself, it would be appropriate for the trial court to make an enquiry from the records of the case with regard to the correct identity of the accused and proceed against the correct accused in the case in accordance with law. For this purpose, petitioner is given liberty to file a petition before the trial court with all - 3 - supporting documents to show that he is not the accused in the case and it is only because of fraudulent act of the actual accused of the case, i.e. Kutubuddin Khan that he has been involved. In case, petitioner files such a petition before the trial court within one month, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner till the trial court comes to a final conclusion with regard to actual identity of the accused. With the above observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)