IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.55635 of 2007 1. Janak Kishore Yadav, son of Late Sadhu Yadav, 2. Kailash Yadav, son of Bhaglu Yadav, 3. Arbind Yadav, son of Ram Pd. Yadav, 4. Subodh Yadav @ Sunil Yadav, son of Ram Pd. Yadav, all of village Sarabad, PS Sono, District Jamui – Petitioners. With Cr.Misc. No. 5352 of 2008 1. Bhaglu Yadav, son of Late Rehan Yadav, 2. Kishun Yadav, son of Nuneshwar Yadav, 3. Bal Mukund Yadav, son of Dineshwar Yadav, 4. Nawal Kishore Yadav @ Nawalesh Yadav, son of Ram Pd. Yadav, all of Sarebad, PS Sono, District Jamui – petitioners. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Lokani Devi, wife of Sato Yadav, village Sarebad, PS Sono, District Jamui – opp. parties in both the cases. 3 6.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. These applications have been filed for quashing the order, dated 8.6.2005 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui in Sono PS Case No. 63/2003, G. R. No. 563/2003, by which cognizance has been taken for the offences under sections 147, 342 and 436 of the Penal Code. The impugned order refers to paragraph nos. 1, 5, 6, 8, 10, 18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29and 43 of the case diary. Paragraph no.6 onwards contains the statements of Umesh Yadav, Ganesh Yadav, Koso Yadav, Pramod Yadav, Awadhesh Yadav, Tulsi Manjhi, Sahdeo Yadav, Dukhani Devi, and Babulal Manjhi. All the witnesses have stated that Sato Yadav had entered the hut of Doman Yadav and opened fire killing the brother of Ram Prasad Yadav. It is said that the house of Doman Yadav caught fire because of explosion of a bomb made by Sato Yadav. All the witnesses in one tone have stated that the 2 informant’s house was not set on fire by the petitioners, rather, it was set on fire by Sato Yadav. Paragraphs 18 and 43 of the case diary refers to the supervision note. In this way this court finds that the court below has committed error in stating that there is evidence against the petitioners of setting fire the house of the informant. The matter was earlier examined with respect to the case of Ram Prasad Yadav against whom there is specific allegation in the FIR that he has set on fire the house of the informant. By order, dated 24.8.2007 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7740/2004 this Court has rightly been noted that there is no evidence whatsoever against Ram Prasad Yadav and has quashed the proceeding as far as it concerned Ram Prasad Yadav. This court finds that in fact there is no evidence against the petitioners in the entire case diary as a result of which the impugned order, dated 8.6.2005 is quashed as far as it concerns the petitioners of both these applications. These applications are allowed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)