IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.38436 OF 2008 VINOD SINGH @ SHADHU SINGH @ PAPPU, SON OF PARSHURAM SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BADKA ROHERA, POLICE STATION BARHARIA, DISTRICT SIWAN ………………………………………………..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SANJAY SINGH, SON OF PARAS NATH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BADKA ROHERA, POLICE STATION BARHARIA, DISTRICT SIWAN ………………………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ********* 3 29/07/2011 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. On perusal of the order dated 21.07.2008 by which the discharge application of the petitioner has been rejected, this Court finds that the only material mentioned in the order is that the name of the petitioner transpired in paragraph 70 of the case diary. It has been stated by the Court below that paragraph 70 is the supervision note of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Siwan which mentions that Shila Devi and Bina Devi have named this petitioner. The question is that whether Shila Devi and Bina Devi have been examined by the Investigating Officer or it is only on the basis of the supervision note that the Court below has come to this conclusion. It would have also been relevant for the Court below to take into account whether these witnesses are chargesheeted witnesses or not. The relationship of these witnesses with the informant should also have been mentioned in the order impugned. 2 I accordingly quash the order dated 21.07.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Siwan in Sessions Trial No. 327 of 2006 (Barharia Police Station Case No. 90 of 2004) and remand the back to the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Siwan to reconsider these aspects and pass a fresh order within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him. Counsel for the petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the concerned Court within a period of one month from today, failing which this application shall stand dismissed. I may make it clear tat this order is being passed subject to the fact that the trial has not commenced in this case. If the trial has commenced in this case, the Trial Court is directed to send a report regarding the status of the case. The Office is directed to list this case under the heading ‘for orders’ on receipt of the report of the Court below, if any. This application is allowed to the extent indicated aforesaid. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)