AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Patna, in which he recommends that the proceedings taken against 3 persons for alleged offenses u/s 211 of the indian Penal Code should be quashed.
The facts are sufficiently set out in the reference and need not be repeated. The only question was whether there was any ground for distinguishing the cases of Batao and Lalbehary from the case of Sudeshwar. It now appears that Batao Kahar''s information before the Police was given for and in the interests of Sudeshwar, the man who presented a complaint before the Sub-Divisional Officer, and that Lalbehary, the third man, has been prosecuted for abetting the offences committed by the other two.
There appears to be no ground on which we could distinguish the present case from the case Brown v. Ananda Lal Mullick 36 Ind. Cas. 857 : 20 C.W.N. 1347 : 25 C.L.J. 59 : 18 CriLJ 25 relied upon by the Sessions Judge. We, therefore, set aside the proceedings which have been taken against the three men.
Let the papers be returned.