IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.891 of 2008 ANJANA RAGHAV W/O- DR. RAGHAVENDRA PRASAD SINGH, R/O- MOHALLA- RAJENDRA NAGAR, GACHHI TOLA, WARD NO. 12. NEAR S.K. HOSTEL, P.S.- BEGUSARAI TOWN IN THE DISTRICT OF BEGUSARAI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. NAVIN KUMAR 3. SACHIN KUMAR BOTH SONS OF BALESHWAR SINGH 4. MANOJ KUMAR, SON OF SAKALDEO SINGH 5. SANTOSH KUMAR, SON OF DULAR SINGH ALL R/O- MOHALLA RAJENDRA NAGAR, GACHHI TOLA, P.S.- BEGUSARAI TOWN IN THE DISTRICT OF BEGUSARAI. For the petitioner : Mr Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. R.B. Roy ‘Raman’, APP ----------- 4 29.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties. Petitioner is informant of Begusarai (Town) P.S. Case No. 171 of 2002 and thus igniter of the criminal proceeding giving rise to Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2008. She is aggrieved by order dated 9.6.2008 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Fast Track Court-I whereby the application preferred by the accuseds (opposite parties herein) under Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) was considered and allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the F.I.R. in order to show that there was clear intention on the part of the accuseds to kidnap the two minor sons of the informant. Intervention of the villagers, however, failed such attempt. It is submitted that the matter was investigated thoroughly whereafter charge-sheet was submitted under diverse sections 2 of the Penal Code including Sections 364/511 IPC. The Court below, having been prima facie satisfied with the materials on record, took cognizance under diverse sections of the Penal Code including Sections 364 and 511 IPC. The said order was challenged by the accuseds in Cr. Rev. No. 215 of 2007. A Bench of this Court by order dated 6.8.2007 (Annexure-4) dismissed the application with liberty to agitate the points at appropriate stage of the proceeding. The matter was committed to the Court of Sessions whereafter an application was filed on behalf of the O.Ps herein claiming that no case under Section 364/511 is made out and as such the matter be remitted back to the Court below since other offences are triable by Magistrate. Learned Trial Court allowed the said application keeping in focus the submissions of the accused- petitioner that there was/is land dispute between the parties and the occurrence is said to have taken place in the day time which is not conceivable. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that going by the allegations contained in the F.I.R. which found substantiated in course of investigation, a case under Section 364 and 511 is made out. It is submitted that learned Trial Court passed the order impressed by the possible defence of the accused persons which is not permissible at that stage of the proceeding. It is thus submitted that the order is bad in law and requires to be interfered with. 3 Learned counsel for the opposite parties, on the other hand, submits that Section 323 of the Code enables the Magistrate to commit the case to the Court of Sessions once during trial it is made apparent that the accuseds have committed offence triable exclusively by the Sessions Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submits that the said provision is applicable if the offence(s) are triable by Magistrate. This Court perused the F.I.R., the order taking cognizance as well as the order passed by this Court on the application preferred by the accused persons. On going through the impugned order, it appears that the allegations per se found doubtful on the ground that parties are on litigating terms and that the said occurrence is said to have taken place during day time. Propelled by these two considerations, learned Court below has taken a view that the allegations are not gullible. In my view, such consideration, at this stage of the proceeding, is not warranted in law. This Court is thus satisfied that the order requires to be interfered with. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Order dated 9.6.2008 passed in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2008 is quashed and set aside. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J)