IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34556 of 2007 RAM LALIT PRASAD SINGH, S/o Sri Chandreshwar Prasad Singh, R/o village Gamharia, P.S. Majorganj, District – Sitamarhi, at present Officer Incharge of Manjhol O.P. District – Begusarai. …… Petitioner Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Bipin Kumar Singh, S/o Late Sitaram Singh, R/o village and P.O. Pawra, P.S. Choria Bariarpur at present Advocate Lawyers Association, Table No. 37, Begusarai. .. Opp. Parties. ----------- 4 19.11.2008 Heard M/s Rai Mukesh Sharma and Aaruni Singh, Advocates, Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Shasidhar Jha, learned counsel for O.P. No. 2. The petitioner claiming to be the Officer Incharge of Manjhol Police Out Post prays for quashing of the order dated 21.4.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai, in Complaint Case No. 189 (C) of 2007, whereby he has taken cognizance against petitioner and one Deepak Kumar for offences under sections 323, 500, 448, 504 I.P.C. and has issued processes. The complainant Bipin Kumar Singh, who is an Advocate who is impleaded herein as O.P. No. 2, filed the aforesaid complaint on 2.2.2007 inter alia alleging that on 30.1.2007 Deepak Kumar along with his criminal associates conjointly resorted to assaulting Vivekanand Singh, the Up – Sarpanch of Pawra Gram Panchayat , caused injury to him and looted articles and in the meanwhile the supporter of Up – Sarpanch gathered and wanted to reciprocate the assault which when the complainant herein got knowledge requested them to refrain from the same and not take law in their own hands. It - 2 - is alleged that a written report was submitted by the injured Vivekanand Singh before the petitioner herein but he did not register any case. Thereafter at about 7 P.M. that very day accused Deepak Kumar reached the house of the complainant accompanied by 3 – 4 unknown criminals armed with rifle, pistols , guns and threatened the complainant to pay Rs. 25,000/- as rangdari tax failing which his son would be kidnapped within 24 hours. Information in this regard was sent by the complainant on 1.2.2007 to the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, with a copy to the petitioner and when the petitioner got information that the matter had been reported to the Superintendent of Police he at around 11 P.M. that night along with accused Dipak Kumar came to the house of the complainant, woke him up and abused and assaulted him and also threatened that his life would be full of danger and he would be booked under the Anti Goonda Act. Deepak Kumar is said to have directed for payment of the rangdari tax and pay the ransom within 24 hours failing which his son would be kidnapped. The complainant’s wife is said to have come out and handed over a sum of Rs. 5000/- to the Police Officer and requested him to save them from further platitudes. The petitioner herein is said to have pocketed the money and asked them to pay a further sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the accused Deepak Kumar. The submissions on behalf of the petitioner is that he had gone to the house of the complainant in discharge of his official duty and therefore the taking of the cognizance without the prior sanction of the appropriate authority was bad in law and could not be - 3 - sustained. The fact whether the taking of Rs. 5000/- by the Police Officer or going to the house of the complainant with accused Deepak Kumar was in discharge of the official duty is a fact which can only be proved by the leading of evidence and that too in course of trial. Merely stating that he is a government servant and was acting in discharge of his official duties is not sufficient. The act performed must have some nexus with the official duty of the person. This can only be done, as stated above, by leading evidence. In the facts and circumstances stated above I find no merit in this application which is dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)