CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.27729 OF 2005 (In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) DR.BIBHA RANI @ BIBHA RANI, W/O RAJESH SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- GHEGHTA, P.S.- MUFFASIL, DISTRICT- SARAN. -----------PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHYAM SUNDER KUMAR, R/O VILLAGE KARAHI KUND P.S.- BASANT PUR, DISTRICT- SIWAN. ------------OPPOSITE PARTIES. For the petitioner : Awadhesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Dr. Mayanand Jha, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA *********** Akhilesh Chandra, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under section 482 Cr. P.C. seeking quashing of the order of cognizance dated 02.01.2002, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in Basantpur P.S. Case No. 107 of 1999, under Section 364A, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Undisputedly, on the statement of Opposite Party No. 2, a case against unknown was instituted alleging abduction of one Sanjay Kumar from the medical shop at Basantpur, district Siwan. After investigation as it appears from the case diary charge sheet was submitted against four persons including one Gautam Singh in 2 whose confessional statement before police recorded in para 113 of the case diary name of the petitioners emerged, keeping the investigation pending. 4. After subsequent investigation supplementary charge sheet also appears submitted against the petitioner and another Bhola Singh keeping the further investigation pending against four more persons and finally investigation was closed after submitting another charge sheet exonerating on Babu Lal Singh and Shailesh Singh Chandan @ Guddu Singh, Sunil Singh, Baka Singh all dead and Bhraham Singh absconder. 5. By supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, judgment of Sessions Trail No. 135 of 2005 delivered by Fast Track Court No. 2, Siwan on 16th July, 2005 has been filed and it is submitted that the two accused persons facing trial Gautam Singh and Bhraham Singh have been acquitted. None of the witnesses examined including the victim has said anything about any of the accused. 6. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioner that accept the confessional statement of one of the accused as recorded in para 113 of the case diary. There is absolutely nothing against her. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also fairly concedes that there is nothing more against the petitioner. 7. It is undisputed in face of judgment of Trial Court, the person on whose Extra Judicial Confession petitioner’s name emerged has already been acquitted. The learned Additional Public 3 Prosecutor, of course prays that at the time order of cognizance there was material as mentioned in para 113 of case diary against the petitioner. Of course by way of Extra Judicial Confession of one of the co-accused. So no error was committed by the Court below while taking cognizance. At the same time after initial hesitation, learned Additional Public Prosecutor further concedes that no useful purpose is going to be served if the petitioner is forced to appear in the Court below and agitate of such points before the Trial Court at the time of hearing on the point of Judge for any other appropriate state of such exercise in face of judgment delivered shall be nothing but futile. 8. In view of the above finding further continuation of the proceeding against the petitioner which has already been stated by earlier powers of this Court in the year 2006 itself is here by quashed and this application is disposed of. Patna High Court Date: 12th August, 2010 S.P. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)