IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.31975 OF 2008 KRISHNA KUMAR SINHA @ BHOLA, SON OF LATE BHARAT NARAYAN SINHA, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA BINODPUR, ARGARA CHOWK, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT KATIHAR VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RANA ABHAY YADAV, SON OF SHRI PARMESHWAR PRASAD YADAV, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA BARMASIA, POLICE STATION MUFFASIL, DISTRICT KATIHAR ……………………………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES ********** 2 19/08/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 05.05.2008 by which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report or in the protest petition which was filed on behalf of the informant who is the eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. The name of the petitioner subsequently transpired after one month in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Counsel further submits that the involvement of this petitioner in the present case is malafide and out of malice because of the fact that the petitioner had filed the - 2 - First Information Report against the informant of the present case two months prior to the present case for which the informant was taken into custody. It is submitted that due to malice, the name of the petitioner has subsequently transpired in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The submission made on behalf of the petitioner may be a good defence and can be substantiated or argued at an appropriate stage. However, this Court does not think it proper to quash the order taking cognizance. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )