IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3298 of 2008 RAM CHANDRA RAI, son of Sahdeo Rai, resident of Village- Purnahi, P.S.Warisnagar, District-Samastipur ------------------- Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --------------- Opp.Party ----------- 2 27-01-2009 Heard Mr. R.S.Pradhan, the learned counsel for the petitioner as also Mr. R.P.S. Pahepuri, the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner, who has been made to figure as one of the accused in Warisnagar P.S. Case no.148 of 2005 under Sections 467,468,420 and 406 I.P.C., has prayed for the quashing of the order dated 20.9.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur, whereby he has taken cognizance under those Sections . In addition thereto, a prayer for the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings has also been made. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had been collecting money from beneficiaries of Indira Awas Scheme illegally.The fardbeyan is supported by the signatures of 100 persons who have signed in favour of allegations against the petitioner. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that many of those signatories, who had signed in support of the fardbeyan, have subsequently filed affidavits in the court to resile from their earlier support to the fardbeyan. Apparently, the process of tampering with the evidence has begun. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for the - 2 - petitioner that there is no iota of materials in the case diary which would in any way make out a case under Sections 467, 468, 420 and 406 I.P.C. In this connection, it was submitted that the persons, who had subsequently filed affidavits in the court resiling from their support to the fardbeyan, have also deposed in similar terms under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and that by itself indicates that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Another reason assigned for false implication of the petitioner is of his having earlier filed Warisnagar P.S. Case no.119 of 2002 against the informant in respect of the kidnapping by them of the petitioner. The case said to have been filed by the petitioner is of the year 2002 and the instant case has been lodged in the year, 2005, i.e. after a difference of three years, which does not auger well for the petitioner since if the instant case is on the basis of enmity due to the earlier case filed by the petitioner, then the counter case or counter blast would have followed immediately thereafter or soon thereafter. Be that as it may, I am not inclined to accept the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find no merit in this application which is dismissed. ( Abhijit Sinha, J ) NKS/-