IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.10304 of 2008 VIJAY TERIAR, SON OF BIBHUTI BHUSHAN TERIAR, RESIDENT OF ROAD NO. 12, HOUSE NO. 62 E, RAJENDRA NAGAR, POLICE STATION – KADAM KUAN, TOWN AND DISTRICT – PATNA. ………….. PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ………….. OPP. PARTY. ----------- 02/ 17.05.2010 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This is a petition for quashing the order dated 18.12.2007 passed by Shri D.M. Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in G.R. Case No. 2452 of 2006 by which he has rejected the petition under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However the case was filed for negligence as the petitioner asked the victim to move the fan and the fan was having current and when the victim tried to move the fan then he received a shock of the current and then died hence after investigation the charge sheet was submitted under Section 304 A of the Indian Penal Code and the cognizance was taken. However, charges have not been framed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petition under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C was filed and it is stated that the said petition was disposed of by the impugned order dated 18.12.2007. However, Section 258 mentions that the Magistrate of First Class in any summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint himself or with the previous sanction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, any other Judicial Magistrate, may, for 2 reasons to be recorded by him, stop the proceedings at any stage without pronouncing any judgment and where such stoppage of proceedings is made after the evidence of the principal witnesses has been recorded, pronounce a judgment of acquittal, and in any other case, release the accused, and such release shall have the effect of discharge. However, taking into consideration the fact that the cognizance has been taken under Section 304 A of the Indian Penal Code and on perusal of the case diary, the Magistrate found that there was sufficient material to proceed with the case and Magistrate has been given direction under Section 258 of the Cr.P.C and hence, I do not find any illegality and irregularity in the impugned order to interfere with and hence the petition is hereby dismissed. Kundan (Gopal Prasad, J.)