Gauri Shankar Sah @ Gauri Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.16923 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -175 Year- 2014 Thana -KEOTI District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Gauri Shankar Sah @ Gauri Sah Son of Rajendra Sah, Resident of Village - Ram Nagar, P.O. - Susta Tolee, Police Station - Gai Ghat, District - Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.M.P Sinha (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-09-2016 Heard Sri Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.M.P. Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor The sole petitioner who was not named as accused in the F.I.R. in Keoti P.S. Case No. 175 of 2014 has approached this court with a prayer to quash an order dated 19.5.2015 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Darbhanga (hereinafter referred to as "Magistrate") after submission of charge sheet has taken cognizance of offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that F.I.R. was lodged against unknown, during investigation petitioner was implicated on the confessional statement of the co-
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16923 of 2016 (2) dt.29-09-2016 2/2 accused who disclosed that he had sold the looted articles to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is also running a jewelry shop and he falsely was implicated.
Fact remains that in a case registered under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code during investigation petitioner's involvement has transpired and thereafter charge sheet was submitted and the learned Magistrate on the basis of charge sheet and materials available on record has passed the order of cognizance. After going through the impugned order I do not find any apparent error warranting interference. The petition stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T