IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.54935 of 2007 KAMESHWAR SHARMA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR --------- 04. 14.05.2010 In the present proceeding the cognizance order dated 23.02.1996 has been challenged, whereby the cognizance has been taken under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though he was named in the F.I.R. but he was not sent up for trial but vide order dated 23.02.1996, on protest cognizance was taken. It is further submitted that the order taking cognizance has been passed with complete non application of mind as in the impugned order it has been recorded that Ambika Singh was not chargesheeted whereas he was actually been chargesheeted and put on trial. It is also submitted that three persons who were chargesheeted and put on trial, have been acquitted vide judgment dated 29th of September, 2001 in Sessions Trial No. 332/94 as contained in Annexure-2. Hence the case of the petitioner is on much better footing than those who have been put on trial. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter on only ground that the order of - 2 - cognizance has been passed in 1996. However, petitioner may raise all his contentions at the time of framing of charge and learned Trial Court will consider the discharge application keeping in view that the chargesheeted accused persons have been acquitted and the petitioner was not sent up for trial. With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of. Shageer (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)