IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.54831 of 2006 SHANKER TURAHA, HASANPURA, M.H.NAGAR, SIWAN. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. BHARAT SAH, KHAJUAN, RASULPUR, SARAN & 3. ABHISHEK KUMAR, KHAJUAN, RASULPUR, SARAN. ----------- 6 25.03.2010. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has come to this court for quashing order dated 3.11.2006 by which cognizance has been taken in Rasulpur Police Station case no. 31 of 2006, GR No. 1754 of 2006 under sections 364A and 120B of the I.P.C. and non bailable warrant against the petitioner has been issued. The informant alleged in the F.I..R. that in the night of 1.7.2006 accused persons including this petitioner entered into his house and took away his son Abhishek Kumar aged about 5 years despite protest from his wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier also on 28.1.2006 accused persons had kidnapped his brother Laxman Sah. The informant in the F.I..R. alleged that his son was kidnapped for ransom. Leaned counsel submits that the allegations are utterly false and case has been instituted on account of previous animus with the prosecution side. Learned counsel further submits that police after investigation submitted final report in favour of the petitioner and even recommended proceedings under sections 182/201 Cr.P.C. against the informant. In support of his case, learned counsel submits that even the victim boy Abhishek has not supported the factum of kidnapping. The statement of victim was - 2 - recorded vide para 115 of the case diary. He stated therein that he was kept at far away place where his ‘aunt’ and ‘mausi’ were also present and was looked after well. Learned counsel submits that many witnesses examined during investigation stated that accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case. On the other hand, counsel for the State submits that informant has supported his version in his subsequent statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. he further submits that one witness vide para 9 of the case diary has also named the petitioner and others as accused. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that petitioner should raise all this point at the time of framing of charge. At this stage, I am not inclined to quash order dated 3.11.2006 taking cognizance. This Court further directs that the learned Magistrate would hear the accused side on the point of charge without prejudice. The instant petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)