IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.26 of 2010 SUDARSHAN OJHA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 29.10.2010 The petitioner prays for a direction to the respondent authorities to arrest all the accused persons who were named in the protest petition in connection with Brahampur (Nainizore) P.S. Case No.92 of 2008 for an offence under sections 364, 302/34 of the Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner is the father of the deceased Putul Oja, who according him has been murdered by the accused persons named in the protest petition contained in Annexure-2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some of the accused persons named in the protest petition are involved in various cases of murder, arson etc. He submits that though the son of the petitioner was murdered within Sahpur P.S. but his dead body was deliberately thrown in Barki Nainizore village, from where it was brought to the Brahampur Nainizore police station and Chaukidar Sri Kant Yadav lodged the case against unknown being Brahampur (Nainizore) P.S. Case No.92 of 2008 under section 302/201 of the Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner being the father of the deceased has lodged a protest petition in which he has named various persons who were involved in the killing of his son Putul Ojha. He further submits that the accused persons are influential persons and one of them even being husband of a local M.L.A. from 2 KHAN Sahpur Constituency. He submits that the police officials of Sahpur P.S. being hands and gloves with the accused persons has collusively submitted final report in their favour in spite of materials existing on record. In support of his contention, he has referred to Annexure-6 series which is statement of the three witnesses recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. by which they have supported the prosecution case. He submits that the police over looking such materials have submitted final report. Learned State counsel submits that the police has submitted final report after due investigation of the case. Having heard counsel for the parties, it is the Magistrate who will decide whether on the materials on record, a prima facie is made out against the accused persons or not. It goes without saying that before deciding on the point of cognizance, the Magistrate would look into the materials available on the record in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)