CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.4379 OF 2004 (In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.) ********* 1. PRAMOD PRASAD @ PRAMOD KUMAR 2. BINOD PRASAD 3. PANNALAL SAH @ PANNA LAL PRASAD 4. MANISH KUMAR @ BHOLA SAH @ MANISH PRASAD 5. PARMANAND SAH @ PARMANAND KUMAR ALL ARE SONS OF LATE KRISHNA LAL SAH ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE – FATEH TOLA, BAIRIYA BAZAR, P.S. TURKAULIYA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. 6. RAJESH SAH @ RAJESH KUMAR, SON OF PARAS SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – FATEH TOLA, BAIRIYA BAZAR, P.S. TURKAULIYA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. 7. RATNESH KUMAR, SON OF TULSI PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KALWARI TOLA, SHANKAR SARAIYA, P.S. TURKAULIYA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. ---------- PETITIONERS. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. ASHOK KUMAR (ADVOCATE), SON OF LATE MOKHATAR RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LAXMIPUR, KACHAHARIYA TOLA, POST SHANKAR SARAIYA, P.S. TURKAULIYA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN. ----------- OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioner : None. For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Dhivendra Singh, Advocate. For the State : Smt. Pushpa Sinha, Advocate. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 12.1.2004 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Motihari in Complaint Case No. 1886 of 2003 by which he has taken cognizance under Sections 147, 323, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. On 5.7.2004, notices were issued to the 2 Opposite Party No. 2 and further proceeding was stayed. On 7.10.2004, the matter was admitted for hearing. 3. In the meanwhile, the opposite party No. 2 has appeared and is present in court to oppose this application. However, the petitioners’ Counsel has not appeared before this Court today. 4. The case of the Complainant is that the accused persons entered into his house and after abusing and assaulting him took away some valuables including money. The complaint was filed on 2.10.2003. 5. On going through the petition, I find there is a mention that the father of the petitioners No. 1 to 5 and a close relative of petitioner Nos. 6 to 8 namely, Late Krishna Lal Sah was abducted and killed for ransom for which Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 65 of 2003 was instituted for offence under Sections 364(A), 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code on 26.3.2003 and charge sheet was submitted against three brothers of the Complainant namely, Awadhesh Rai, Sheevjee Rai and Ganesh Yadav. Since only two of the Complainant’s brothers were arrested and the third brother was still absconding, processes against him under Section 83 Cr. P.C. was issued initially. Thereafter, the Police executed the order of attachment on 30.9.2003 6. It is relevant to state here that when the order of attachment was issued on 30.9.2003, the Complainant came 3 to the shop of the petitioners No. 1 to 5 and threatened them of dire consequences on account of which an informatory petition was filed in the court below against the Complainant on 1.10.2003. Then being aggrieved with the action taken by the Police at the behest of the prosecution, the present case was instituted on 2.10.2003 with counter charges. 7. From the aforegoing facts, it is clear that the case is nothing but a proceeding initiated on account of malice and vendetta. 8. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 12.1.2004 passed by Sri S.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Motihari, in Complaint Case No. 1886 of 2003, Enquiry No. 204 of 2003 by which cognizance was taken against the petitioners, is hereby quashed. Patna High Court, Patna. Dated, the 9th July, 2010 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)