IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30458 of 2008 Ram Kumar Singh, son of late jagdeo Singh, resident of village- harpur Patikwara, P.S- Mahnar and Dist- Vaishali. ………………………………………………………Petitioner. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2. Sanjay Kumar son of Satya narayan Prasad, resident of village + P.S Khutauna, dist- Madhubani. ………………………………………………….Opposite Parties. For the petitioners: Mr. Rajib Ranjan Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. B.P. Singh, A.P.P. ------------- 3 18.10.2011 This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C, is for quashing the order dated 18.07.2005 passed by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur in Complaint case No. 434/2004/Trial No. 43/08, summoning the accused- petitioners finding prima facie case for offence under Sections 147, 323, 379, 380 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 The brief facts, leading to this application, are that OP. No.2, Sanjay Kumar, filed the Complaint petition, numbered as Complaint Case No.434 of 2004 with the contention that he had a shop in the name of “Ohm Digital Studio” in Laukahi Bazar and in the east side, Jawahar Mehto used to run the “Tent House”. Accused Jawahar Mehto usually takes money from 2 opposite party no. 2, On 15.4.2004 the accused Jaleshwar Mahato took cash Rs. 10,000/- from Op No. 2 but money was not return in time then on 20.5.04 OP. No. 2 made a request to Jawahar Mahato to return the money but he refused and called other accused persons who came with lathi and Bhala and started assaulting him by fists and slabs and also took the cash of Rs. 2000/- from his pocket. Regarding the said incident panchayati was arranged in which Jawhar Mahato assured to return the money but he did not obey the decision. Further case of Opp. Party No. 2 is that he closed the shop of laukhi bazaar and decided to do business at Khutauna bazaar. On 30.7.04 at about 2.30 p.m Jawahar Mahato along with 4 to 5 other persons and Jamadar R.K. Singh came from motor cycle at his house. At that time petitioner R.K.Singh started to abuse to O.P. No.2, to enter in the house. On protest O.P.No.2, was misbehaved and at that time a box containing gold and silver was taken away entering in house by abusing the family members. It is also alleged by O.P.No. 2 that at the time of occurrence petitioner R.K.Singh Jamadar was in civil dress. 3 After filing the Complaint petition the A.C.J.M, Jhaqnjharpur, on enquiry, summon the accused named in complaint petition including the petitioner finding prima facie 3 case under Section 147,323,379,380 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code on 18.7.05. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order the petitioner has preferred the present application. 4 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that before the alleged date of occurrence the petitioner was posted as an A.S.I at police station Laukahi. On the written report of co-accused Jawahar Lal Laukahi P.S.Case No. 58 of 2004 was registered under Sections 381 and 406 of the I.P.C against O.P. No. 2 on 29.07.04 and the investigation was handed over to him, when the petitioner reached at the house of opposite party No. 2 in course of investigation then O. P. No. 2 and his family members created hinderance in arrest. As such only with a view to put undue pressure that false complaint case has been lodged naming the petitioners also. 5 From the Complaint petition it appears that the complainant O.P.NO. 2 has stated about the dispute arosed due to not returning the money Rs. 10,000/- by the accused Jawahar Lal. On the alleged date of accurrence Jawahar Lal along with 4 to 5 other reached at the house of O.P.NO. 2 and at that time petitioner also reached and took away the box containing gold and silver ornaments from the house of the complainant O.P. 4 No.2. The charge sheet of Laukahi P.S.Case No. 58 of 2004 (Annexure-2 to this application) disclosed that a case under Section 386 of I.P.C was instituted against the two accused including the complainant O.P. No. 2 on 29.7.04 prior to alleged date of occurrence i.e. 30.7.04 on the basis of report of co- accused Jawharlal and the petitioner was deputed as the investigating officer of the case. In that case on investigation the charge sheet has been, submitted on 20.10.05 by the petitioner as investigating officer. 6 As such taking into consideration the allegation of the complaint petition and also the charge sheet of Laukahi P.S.Case No.58/04 Annexure- 2 to this application, it appears that the O.P.No. 2 had oblique motive against the petitioner and to put undue pressure in the investigation the petitioner who is I.O of that case has been made accused. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances the impugned order dated 18.7.05 taking cognizance of the offence in respect to petitioner is hereby quashed and the application is allowed. Namita ( Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.)