IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.9176 OF 2009 RAM BINAY SINGH, SON OF UMESHI SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MASAURHA, POLICE STATION PALIGANJ, DISTRICT PATNA VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR ********** 2 17/08/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.02.2009 by which he has been summoned to face trial under Section 319 of the Indian Penal Code. Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that at the initial stage he was named in the First Information Report and after investigation, the police found that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence rather he was engaged in census work. The engagement of the petitioner in census work has been supported in the case diary by one Akhileshwar Kumar Rai under whom the petitioner was working. At the stage of taking cognizance, the prosecution/informant challenged the finding of the Investigating Officer and prayed before the Court below that the cognizance should be taken against the petitioner. The matter was contested and by order dated 07.07.2001 the Additional Subordinate Judge VI, Patna exonerated the petitioner and refused to take cognizance against him. - 2 - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the trial, the witnesses have reiterated the statements made by them earlier and on the basis of their statements, steps have been taken under Section 319 of the Indian Penal Code summoning the petitioner to face trial. The main submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Court below ought to have waited for the examination of the Investigating Officer who would be able to give a clear picture regarding the involvement of the petitioner. All these aspects can be argued on behalf of the petitioner once he appears before the Court below and is given an opportunity by the Court below to cross- examine the witnesses with respect to his involvement in the alleged occurrence. At this stage, this Court cannot interfere with the order impugned. In the result, this application is dismissed Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )