IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.24838 OF 2007 ABHIMANYU MAHTO, SON OF ARJUN MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAVTOLIA KATHARA, POLICE STATION AMARPUR, DISTRICT BANKA VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. BHARAT MAHTO, SON OF LATE JHAGARU MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAVTOLIA, POLICE STATION AMARPUR, DISTRICT BANKA …………………………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES ********* 5 07/07/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Nobody appears for the Opposite Party No. 2. This application has been filed against the order dated 03.04.2007 by which the Court below has charged the petitioner under Sections 447, 427, 436, & 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is that the petitioner is said to have handed over the match box to the co-accused to set on fire the hut of the informant. Learned Counsel submits that a counter case has been filed in which cognizance has already been taken against the Opposite Parties. The main submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that the case was found to be false during the investigation and the Investigating Officer had reported that the alleged hut actually belongs to the petitioner and a false case has been instituted against them. The Court below has taken 2 cognizance on the basis of the protest petition. It is further submitted that both the cases relate to the same occurrence, and therefore, this Court directs that Amarpur Police Station Case No. 28 of 1999 should be heard with Amarpur Police Station Case No. 29 of 1999. Therefore, the Court below is directed to examine the feasibility of hearing the cases together and if possible the trial of the two cases should be taken up together. This application is accordingly allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )