IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1049 of 2008 RAM NARAYAN YADAV & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 05/ 14.09.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners seek quashing of the FIR registered as Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 65 of 2008. Learned counsel submits that Title Suit No. 03 of 2006 was instituted before the competent court in which certain orders came to be passed on 17.9.2007 appointing a Receiver and for harvesting of crops. Placing reliance on Annexure-6 dated 30.5.2008, it is submitted that the Incharge Magistrate/ Circle Officer, Kusheshwar Asthan submitted a report to the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Biraul that in pursuance of the orders of the court, he himself supervised the harvesting of the crops on 11..4.2008 in between 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. Notwithstanding the same the present FIR came to be lodged on 6.5.2008 by the Chaukidar making allegations against the petitioners that on 11.4.2008, the petitioners forcibly harvested the crops from the lands in question identified as Khata No. 30 (old) Khesra No. 171, Khata No. 19 (new) having an area of 2 katha 15 dhurs at 7.00 p.m. The submission, therefore, is that surely full grown crops would not have resurfaced on the lands. The allegations in the First Information Report are therefore absurd and improbable. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Law & Order. Paragraph 8 of the counter - 2 - affidavit seeks to suggest that the crops were partially harvested by the petitioners when the remaining crops were harvested by the Magistrate. Unfortunately, the Incharge Magistrate who harvested the crops on 11.4.2008 did not submit any report of the partially harvested crops prior to the same. However, paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit itself goes to state that the Investigating officer was yet to record the statement of the Magistrate, who carried out the harvesting of crops on 11.4.2008. This Court from the report of the Incharge Magistrate dated 30.5.2008 does not find any material of partial harvesting done prior to 11.4.2008 as suggested. Be that as it may, those are primarily matters for investigation. Once the authorities have stated on oath that they are yet to record the statement of the Incharge Magistrate, who submitted the report on 30.5.2008 with regard to harvesting done on 11.4.2008, it is not possible to pass any orders at this stage. This Court directs that the statement of the Incharge Magistrate, who submitted the report dated 30.5.2008 with regard to harvesting of crops be recorded in the presence of the and in the chambers of S.P., Darbhanga as part of the investigation. The investigation be then brought a conclusion in accordance with law thereafter. However, as was submitted before this Court, if charge sheet has been submitted without recording the statement of the Incharge Magistrate, who conducted the harvesting on 11.4.2008, the Superintendent of Police is directed to make further investigation and - 3 - record the statement of the Incharge Magistrate in like manner and proceed to submit the same before the court below in accordance with law. The writ application stands disposed off. DKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)