IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23852 of 2009 MD.HAZRAT, son of Saibur Rahman, village Hathia Diara, PS Mufassil, district Katihar – petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur and Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A. P. P. 3 9.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for the second time for quashing the order, dated 4.5.2007 passed in Kadwa PS Case No. 14 of 2007 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioner and others for the offences under sections 364A and 368/34 of the Penal Code. An FIR was instituted alleging therein that one Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Rintu, son of the informant was kidnapped by some miscreants on a black colored Bolero jeep. The vehicle was recovered with its driver Anil Singh and on the basis of confessional statement of Anil Singh, the boy was recovered from a maize field. During investigation it appears that one of the accused, namely, Abdul Harim was arrested and he has made a confessional statement accepting his guilt. In the confessional statement it has been stated that he along with Raju,d Lalo Thakur, Mister and Hamir had gone to the house of the petitioner around 11-12 in the afternoon. The petitioner runs a Kabari shop and after taking meal they proceeded to Sanauli Bazar. They reached there at around 6-7 PM and thereafter it is said that the crime was committed. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if it is accepted that the entire facts mentioned in the case diary and the confessional statement are correct, they would not reveal that the petitioner was involved or was part of the plan to commit the said crime. The confessional statement on the basis of which the petitioner has been made accused does not indicate that the petitioner accompanied Abdul Harim or that after committing the crime, co- accused persons were in touch with this petitioner. The facts aforesaid do not indicate the petitioner’s involvement in the said occurrence. In a case where there is not even prima facie evidence against a person sought to be sent up for trial, this court can in exercise of its power under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. quash the order of cognizance as far as it concerns the involvement of that person. This case would be squarely covered by the conditions 1 and 3 of the decision rendered in the case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, (1992) Supp. 1 SCC 335. Thus, the order impugned taking cognizance, dated 4.5.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in Kadwa PS Case No. 14/2007, giving rise to S.T. No. 413/2007 pending before the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, FTC V, Katihar is quashed so far it relates to the petitioner. This application is allowed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)