IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34575 of 2007 RAJESH MANJHI & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 6 30.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 16.6.2006 passed by the J.M. Ist class, Siwan , in complaint case No. 594 of 2006, Trial No. 3698 of 2006 by which cognizance of offence has been taken under sections 147, 148, 149,, 323, 435, 436, 479, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and for amalgamation of this case with Hussainganj P.S. case No.53 of 2006 which has been registered under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 435, 436, 379/427 of the I.P.C. Learned counsel submits that one Atama Ram Mukhiya was attacked who was subsequently brought to Sadar Hospital Siwan, from where he was referred to P.M.C.H. and he died during the course of treatment. A first information report bearing Hussainganj P.S. case No. 52 of 2006 under section 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code was lodged. In retaliation of the death of Atama Ram Mukhiya his associates and supporters burnt the houses of some of the persons for which Hussainganj P.S. case No. 53 of 2006 dated 27.3.2006 under section 436, 379, 427 etc. as noted above was lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact two cases were instituted in respect of the murder of Atma Ram Mukhiya being Hussainganj P.S. case No. 54 of 2006 and 52 of 2006 as noted above .This court by order dated 9.2.2007 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3562/07 quashed the prosecution of Hussainganj P.S. case no. 54 of 2006 but however directed that materials collected in Hussainganju P.S. Case No. 54 of 2006 would be used in - 2 - Hussainganj P.S. case no. 52 of 2006. The petitioner submits that sympathizers of late Atma Ram Mukhiya allegedly are said to have retaliated and attacked various suspects on 29.3.2006. For the same occurrence Hussainganj P.S. case No. 53 of 2006 and complaint case bearing 594/06 were filed apart frtom some other complaint also. Learned counsel submits that the two cases be amalgamated. I find substance in contention of learned counsel for petitioner. For almost same occurrence two and more cases have been filed. In police case namely Hussainganj P.S. case no. 53 of 2006 charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken. In the instant complaint case 594 of 2006 under 436, 427, 479, 323, 149, 148, 147, cognizances has been taken and accused have been summoned. In the circumstances I direct that both the cases will be tried together and proceed in terms of section 210(2) (3) Cr.P.C. as far as they may be applicable. With the Aforesaid observation this application is disposed of. (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) M.Rahman