Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20115/2016dismissed

Brahmanand Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2016-09-23Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20115 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4 Year- 2006 Thana -NAURANGIA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== Brahmanand Pandey S/o Phulena Pandey, resident of villageHanumanganj, P.O. -Bhaisaha, P.S.- Hanumanganj, Tehsil - Khadda, District-Kushi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, permanent resident of villageRajahwa( Rajahi ) Reta, P.S. Naurangiya, District - West Champaran, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratyush Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. C. Sen Pd. Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is challenging the order of cognizance dated 25.10.2008 arising from Naurangia P.S. Case No. 04 of 2006 for offence under section 25(1-B) a/26 of the Arms Act.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation made in the first information report is completely wrong though basically he has a native place in West Champaran, but from the childhood, he has been living in the State of Uttar Pradesh in the district of Kushi Nagar. Some accused persons have gone for hunting of deer and when the Forest official

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20115 of 2016 (2) dt.23-09-2016 2/2 identified them, they have thrown their gun in the house of petitioner and fled away. He has further submitted that the petitioner has no knowledge about the case earlier and only he could know in the month of January 2016 and directly approached this Court after a long period whereas the order has been passed on 25.10.2008.

This Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of cognizance. However, if the petitioner approaches the Magistrate, who will examine the case of the petitioner and pass necessary order in accordance with law.

The counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the statement recorded under section 164 Cr. PC its value, will be seen at the appropriate stage, not at this stage. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T