Criminal Miscellaneous No. 7685 OF 2009 (Quashing) Against the order dated 16.10.2006 passed by Sri Manoj Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No. 1802/2006 as also order dated 07.02.2009 passed by Sri Arbind Madhav, Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-III, Bhagalpur in Cr. Rev. No. 265/06, Tr. No. 39/08. ************ Sanjay Kumar Upadhyay, S/o Sri Krishna Upadhaya, Resident of Village-Chargaha, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District-West Champaran (Bettiah) at present Executive Magistrate, Bhagalpur. ……(Petitioner) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Umesh Prasad Singh, S/o Late Murlidhar Singh, Resident of Sarokh, P.S.-Sajaur Sahkund, District-Bhagalpur. -----(Opposite Parties) ************* For the Petitioner : Sri N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv. : Sri Ajay Kumar Jha, Adv. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Bhola Prasad, Adv. : Mr. Swapnil Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Mahanand Jha, APP. ************** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J. 1. The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 16.10.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No. 1802/2006 by which it has taken cognizance. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the order dated 07.02.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-III, Bhagalpur passed in Cr. Rev. No. 265/06, Tr. No. 39/08 by which it has confirmed the order of cognizance. 2 2. The case of the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 is that the occurrence is said to have taken place during the election of Mukhiya of Dariyapur Gram Panchayat in the year 2006 in which there were 11 contestants for the post of Mukhiya on 11/12.06.2006 counting of the votes were done in which accused Shyamli Devi lost the said post but the result was not declared. It is alleged that on 10.06.2006 even though the counting started one Sitaram Singh was declared elected as ward member. On 11.06.2006 at about 1 P.M. there was suddenly a declaration that one Josna Rani had been declared successful to the post of Mukhiya. The petitioner who was the Block Development Officer- cum-Election Officer allegedly accepted bribe of Rs. 1,50,000/- from accused Ajit Singh and told both of them to give an application for recounting. Within half hour those votes which had been cancelled were counted but no result was declared. At that time also Josna Rani was winning and her supporters went home to celebrate the victory. When they returned they saw Shyamali Devi and her husband going into the room of the present petitioner at which they became suspicious as to why the election of the Mukhiya had not been declared there. On 12.06.2006 at about 4 A.M suddenly it was declared that Shyamali Devi had been elected to the post of Mukhiya. It was alleged that the petitioner had 3 manipulated the results on account of having been bribed by Ajit Singh. There was a protest on account of this in which many persons were seriously injured and Shahpur P.S. Case No. 109/2005 was instituted. On 09.09.2006 i.e. three months later when the complainant was sitting at his door and talking as to how the petitioner had declared the results after accepting bribe the accused persons came to his door and started abusing him. When they protested accused Ajit Singh and Umesh Prasad Singh hit the complainant and started to drag him. The rest of the accused persons entered his house and ransacked the same. Ajit Singh opened his Godrej and took away Rs. 25,000/- and threatened them. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was the Block Development Officer- cum-Returning Officer of the said election and when one Shyamali Devi wife of the complainant lost elections the complainant and others protested and committed various excesses for which a case was instituted against them. Three months later evidently this complaint was filed which is nothing but a sequel to what had happened on the date of election. In the present complaint no role has been attributed to the petitioner in this incident. 4 4. Considering the nature of allegations and the background in which the two cases were instituted, in my opinion, the same is nothing but an exaggerated backlash to what had happened on the date of election. It also reeks of political vendetta. 5. In view of such, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding as against the petitioner by order dated 16.10.2006 passed by Sri Manoj Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No. 1802/2006 as also order dated 07.02.2009 passed by Sri Arbind Madhav, Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-III, Bhagalpur in Cr. Rev. No. 265/06, Tr. No. 39/08 is quashed. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 8th July, 2011. NAFR/Vikash/-