IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.696 of 1998 KUMARI PHULA SINHA wife of Binod Kumar Chouhan, Resident of Village- Mahuli, P.S.-Kauwa Kole (Rupau), District- Nawadah. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawadah 3. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nawadah 4. Mithilesh Chouhan 5. Ramashray Chouhan 6. Ashok Chouhan 7. Ram Brichh Chouhan 8. Rajeshwar Chouhan All (4) to (8) are sons of Jagdish Chouhan, Residents of Village- Mahuli, P.S.-Kauwa Kole (Rupau), District- Nawadah. . . . . . Respondents. For the Petitioner : Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate For respondent No. 4 to 8 : Mr. Arun Kumar No.1, Advocate. ----------- 9/ 09.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as well as private respondents. The petitioner has prayed for direction to the trial court in seisin of S.T. no. 227 of 1997 / S.T. 33 of 1997, to record the statement of petitioner as directed by this Court vide order dated 19.08.1998 passed in Cr.W.J.C. no. 155 of 1998. One Siya Ram Chouhan was murdered and one Rambriksh Chouhan was injured. One Mithlesh Chouhan lodged First Information Report being Kawakol P.S. case no. 159 of 1996 under Sections 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. In the aforesaid case, the injured alleged that his uncle Siya Ram Chouhan has been done to death by Puna Chouhan, his son-in-law and his grand son. The son-in-law of Puna Chouhan namely Vinod Chouhan happens to be the cousin of the informant. After two months of the occurrence, this petitioner filed a 2 Complaint case, in which he named the assailant. The complaint case filed by the complainant was dismissed as two parallel cases cannot proceed for the same offence. However, this Court granted liberty to the petitioner to move the court where the case is pending for recording statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and this Court also granted liberty to make prayer for reinvestigation of the matter and the court shall pass order in accordance with law. A copy of order dated 19.08.1998, passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 155 of 1998 is annexed as Annexure-3 to this application. Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition in the complaint case filed by her bearing complaint case no. 199 of 1997, which was dismissed earlier. The learned Magistrate was of the view that as the criminal case being Kawakol P.S. case no. 159 of 1996 has been committed to the Court of Sessions, the petitioner ought to have filed a petition before the court concerned. Thereafter the petitioner filed her petition before the learned Sessions Court. Learned trial court dismissed the petition, as not tenable. Heard counsel for the parties, this Court made two directions in order dated 19.08.1998 passed in Cr.W.J.C. no. 155 of 1998: (i) recording of statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and (ii) the petitioner may make a prayer for reinvestigation before the learned court below, which will pass order in accordance with law. So far as second direction was concerned, there was no binding order save and except to pass order in accordance with 3 law, whether reinvestigation is required in the case or not. However, the first direction was incumbent upon the learned trial court that as per the order, the trial court ought to have recorded the statement of the petitioner under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Section 164 of Cr.P.C. provides that statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. can be recorded during investigation and enquiry. Nonetheless, the order of this Court was binding upon the trial court, as such this Court directs that the court should examine the petitioner, as a court witness, if the trial is not over by now or fixed for argument. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be communicated to learned Sessions Judge, Nawada in seisin of S.T. No. 227 of 1997 / 33 of 1997 by the office. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)