Ashok Jha vs The State of Bihar and Union of India (UOI)

Akhilesh Chandra, J.—Learned Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer portion naming the court where the case is pending.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned Counsel for Central Bureau of Investigation, opposite party No. 2.

This is an application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of Sessions Trial No. 664 of 2003 arising out of Khazanchi Haat P.S. Case No. 112 and 117, both of 2000, at the relevant time pending in the Court of learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia now on transfer by order of this Court before Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Patna with Sessions Trial No. 481 of 2006.

Relevant facts of this case is Khazanchi Haat P.S. Case No. 112 of 2000, under Sections 302/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act against unknown was instituted on the basis of information given by one Havildar Jai Jai Ram Kunwar and Khazanchi Haat P.S. Case No. 117 of 2000 on the basis of Fardbayan of Sanjay Kumar Singh against five named accused persons but the petitioner was not named, subsequently during investigation his name emerged.

During the pendency of investigation it was decided by the State to entrust the investigation of both the cases to the Central Bureau of Investigation. Accordingly, Notification was issued and R.C. 9(S) of 2001 and R.C. 10(S) of 2001 were instituted and investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation was initiated.

After transfer of investigation from State Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation, there was no case pending for investigation before Khazanchi Haat Police Station but inadvertently parallel investigation also proceeded. Charge sheet was submitted against a few including the petitioner, cognizance was taken and case was committed to the Court of Sessions where numbered as Sessions Trial No. 664 of 2003.

At the instance of Central Bureau of Investigation, opposite party No. 2, aforesaid Sessions Trial No. 664 of 2003 was transferred from the Court at Purnia to the competent Court, of Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Patna wherein Sessions Trial No. 481 of 2006, arising out of two cases afore-mentioned, transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation, was pending

Counter affidavit followed by supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by opposite party No. 2 and in supplementary counter affidavit it is clearly stated that in investigation nothing could be found against the petitioner and Centre Bureau of Investigation has, ultimately, made prayer before the Court to exonerate the petitioner from the case. Matter is pending before the Court concerned.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for Central Bureau of Investigation both are in agreement with the submissions made by learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that in view of the facts and circumstances, stated above, further proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 664 of 2003 arising out of Khazanchi Haat P.S. Case No. 112 and 117, both of 2000, are, in fact, needless. So it should not be permitted to continue any more.

In view of the above, without affecting independent appreciation by the court below, the materials coming out of investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation, proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 664 of 2003 arising out of Khazanchi Haat P.S. Case No. 112 and 117, both of 2000, are hereby quashed. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of.