IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20772 of 2007 RAJKUMAR PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Amrendra Nath Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, A.P.P. For O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate O R D E R This application by one of the F.I.R. named accused of Sathi P.S. Case No. 193 of 2004 arising out of Complaint Case No. 11C of 2001 registered under section 364 I.P.C. is for quashing of entire proceeding against the petitioner including the alleged mechanical cognizance taken by the order dated 10.10.2006 passed therein by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah. The main contention of the petitioner is that he is Rajkumar Prasad and not Rajkumar Christian as named in the complaint petition as well as in the process issued for attachment (Annexure 3). In this connection reference was made to an affidavit purported to have been sworn by the informant, Sumitra Devi, before Notary Public (available at page 25 of the brief) with the purpose of showing that Rajkumar Prasad, Son of Ganesh Prasad, was never named by her in the complaint petition filed by her. It was also submitted that it would be apparent from the supplementary charge sheet that the same was submitted against one Rajkumar Christian and on the basis thereof cognizance was taken and relying on the same, it was sought to be submitted that the petitioner not being Rajkumar Christian was - 2 - wrongly sought to be prosecuted. Unfortunately this Court exercising powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. is not competent to decide the issue proposed to be raised since the issue raised involves leading of evidence in support of or against the proposal of the petitioner not being Rajkumar Christian. Moreover the plea that the petitioner is not Rajkumar Christian is the defence of the petitioner which cannot be looked into at this stage. However, it must be mentioned that at the back of Annexure 3 which is the order of attachment issued to the petitioner, the A.S.I., Sathi P.S. has made an endorsement that the house of Rajkumar Christain @ Rajkumar Prasad , Son of Ganesh Prasad, Christian Tola, Main Road, Chanpatia was dilapidated and no article was available therein which could be attached in execution of the process. Due regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and discussions made above I find no merit in this application and the same is dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise the issue of his identity at the time of framing of charge and in the event of such an issue being raised, the learned trial court will examine the same and pass orders in accordance with law. The Patna High Court The 24th July, 2008 Sanjay Pd./A.F.R. (Abhijit Sinha, J.)