IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.71 of 2008 RAMSAKAL MAHTO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 05.01.2009. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside order taking cognizance dated 12.3.2007, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in Banmankhi Police Station case no. 231 of 2004 registered for offences under sections 302/34 I.P.C. The petitioner states that one Maheshwar Mahto filed the aforesaid case in respect of murder of petitioner’s father, namely, Baldeo Mahto. In the aforesaid FIR, said Masheshwar Mahto suspected the hands of others causing Dharmalal Mahto and Prem Chand Mahto, with whom the deceased was having some dispute. The petitioner submits that in fact Maheshwar Mahto is a culprit and in order to save himself he has filed the instant case. He submits that the petitioner’s mother,namely, Mosmat Nirmala Devi, first wife of the deceased nor the petitioner has been examined. On this basis, he pleads for reinvestigation of the case. Learned counsel for the State submits that already case has been committed to the court of sessions. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the petitioner has not made out any case of re-investigation of the case. The prayer is rejected. It would be open to the petitioner to produce evidence in support of his defence at appropriate stage. Shashi. (S.P.Singh,J)