IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36637 of 2008 PRAVEEN KUMAR SINGH, S/O Brajesh Kumar Singh, R/O Vill- Tetrath, P.S. Akorhi Gola, Distt- Rohtas. ……..Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Hareram Singh, S/O Gupteshwar Singh. 3. Ramdeo Singh. 4. Hriday Singh. 5. Ramshray Singh, All sons of Late Ram Janam Singh. 6. Jairam Singh. 7. Upendra Singh, both sons of Hazari Singh. 8. Haridwar Singh, S/O Late Budhram Singh. All R/O Vill- Tetrath, P.S. Akorhi Gola, Distt- Rohtas. ……..Opposite Parties. ----------- 3 14.02.2011 The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 05.08.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Rohtas at Sasaram in G.R. No. 689 of 2004, whereby the learned Court below has rejected the application of the petitioner for re-committing the case to the Court of Sessions in exercise of power under Section 323 of the Cr.P.C. It is admitted fact that the charge sheet was submitted for the offence to be tried by the Magistrate and the cognizance was also taken under the same Sections. There is no doubt that the Magistrate has the power to re-commit the case to the Court of 2 Sessions, if the evidences come to that effect. The trial Court is in better position to decide the application under Section 323 of the Cr.P.C. However, rejection of the application of the petitioner by the impugned order does not preclude the petitioner to file a fresh application on the basis of evidences available on record at present. If any such application is being filed, the learned Court below may consider the same on the basis of evidence available on record in accordance with law. With the above observation this application is disposed off. Bhardwaj/- ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)