Santosh Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Bihar & Anr.

Heard the parties.

The present petition has been filed for quashing the First Information Report (F.I.R) of Shikarpur P.S Case No. 440 of 2017, dated 18.10.2017 registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code & Section 27 of Arms Act lodged against the unknown miscreants.

The prosecution story is that one Vipin Dhar Dubey filed a written report on 18.10.2017 at 11:00 hours before S.H.O of Shikarpur Police Station alleging therein inter alia that on 18.10.2017 at 07:00 A.M. his son Santosh Kumar Dubey left house for going to the house of Santosh Kumar Mishra (Petitioner) saying that he called him and his son to get the job of service contractor for cleaning and maintenance at Railway Station and as the deceased had to pay the wages to his workmen, he left his home with Rs. 8 lakhs in his hand bag and proceeded at 10:00 A.M. While talking on phone with his maternal uncle Ramesh Ojha, he said that he was at the house of Santosh Kumar Mishra at 10:50 A.M. The informant further alleged that he got information from Sunil Dubey of Gobraura that his son Santosh Kumar Dubey was shot dead by two unknown miscreants, who ran away towards Ramnangar Road and he reached there and saw that his son was lying injured and it is also stated that his son used to keep mobile phones bearing sim Nos. (1) 9006384975, (2) 9431691933, (3) 7004142741, and (4) 9031467975, which were working.

That on the basis of aforesaid written report Shikarpur Police Station drew up a formal First Information Report and registered a case bearing Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 440/2017 dated 18.10.2017 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was not named in the FIR and it was lodged initially against unknown persons and on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused persons, this petitioner was named with the present occurrence. It is submitted that, in fact, this petitioner was threatened by one Vinay Sharma from jail and asked to pay Rs. 50.000/- as extortion money for which this petitioner lodged a case, which has been registered as Shikarpur P.S Case No. 441 of 2017, dated 21.10.2017. It is pointed out that one Ravi Kumar Thakur confessed his guilt to the extent that at the instance of said Vinay Sharma along with Parvez Alam got the deceased identified and killed him. It is submitted that with all such matter, charges were framed against this petitioner by the learned trial court and, therefore, facing trial/allegation is amounting to misuse of the process of law and, therefore, the FIR qua petitioner with consequential proceedings including framing of charges be set-aside/quashed.

Learned APP while opposing the prayer of quashing petition submitted that during investigation, sufficient incriminating material was surfaced against this petitioner and, therefore, the police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against this petitioner and on the basis of same, the learned trial court framed charges against this petitioner, whereafter trial is under progress. It is submitted that issues which are raised by the petitioner is disputed questions of facts which cannot be decided at present stage.

This Court is also convinced with the argument of learned APP that dispute raised regarding facts and the veracity of same can be ascertained during the trial only.

Accordingly, the present petition is devoid of any merit and, therefore, the same stands dismissed.

Let the copy of the judgment be sent to learned trial court forthwith with TCR, if any.