IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14822 of 2008 BIRENDRA RAM, SON OF SRI GAUTAM RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAIGAMBARPUR NARAYA TOLA, POLICE STATION BANIAPUR, DISTT. SARAN AT CHAPRA. ------ PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RA, SINGAR RAM, SON OF GYANI RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAIGAMBARPUR NARAYAN TOLA, POLICE STATION BANIAPUR, DISTT. SARANT AT CHAPRA. ----------- OPPOSITE PARTIES. 2. 21.01.2011 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the State Mr. Hirday Prasad Singh. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 11.9.2007 passed in Cr. Revision No. 3 of 2007 by the learned Sessions Judge, Saran, whereby the order dated 17.11.2006 passed in Trial No. 2184 of 2006 by learned Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, has been affirmed whereby learned Judicial Magistrate committed the case to the court of Sessions by exercise of power under Section 323 of the Cr. P.C. Initially a police case was registered under Sections 147, 148, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, the charge sheet was also submitted under the same provision of the Indian Penal Code. There is a counter version of the case also which was registered under Section 307 I.P.C. and ultimately after commitment, it has been registered as Sessions Trial No. 688 of 2005 pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-IV, Chapra. The learned court below passed the 2 impugned order after giving opportunity to the petitioner on the ground that both the FIRs lodged for the same occurrence, hence, in the interest of justice, under the settled principle of law, the Magistrate exercised the jurisdiction of committing the case to the court of Sessions. It is well settled law that if the two cases arise out of the same occurrence or committed under the same transaction, then in the interest of justice it is desirable that it should be tried by the same court. Learned Additional Court has rightly refused to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned orders as this Court feels that the learned court below has passed the order under Section 323 of the Cr. P.C. in the interest of justice. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. S.Ali (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)