TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions to the Bihar Assembly as an independent candidate. While the polling of votes was in progress, Bharat Singh was sitting in the Election office when he received information that bogus votes were being cast at a particular booth and upon hearing a bomb explosion at about 11.30 a.m., he proceeded to the place where the incident was taking place. According to the F.I.R. version, the informant reached the place in a jeep while Bharat Singh followed him on a motorcycle. On reaching the place they were informed that a boy had sustained injuries and had been rushed to the Maharajganj State Hospital for treatment. 2. When they were leaving the hospital premises, Uma Shankar Singh who was a candidate of the Samata Party in the Assembly electi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case diary. 4. By virtue of the order of the High Court, investigation continued both by the CID and the local police and it was decided to file a report in final form against the Petitioner, though some other accused were charge- sheeted. However, after examining the materials in the case diary, the Chief Judicial Magistrate differed with the Final Report submitted by the investigating agency to take cognizance against Jitendra Swami and some other accused persons. 5. This led the Petitioner to file an application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for discharge from the case. The said application was taken up for consideration by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan, who by his order dated 9th March, 2007, rejected the petitioner' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he enactment of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, if the Magistrate disagreed with the Final Report filed by the investigating agency, he was at liberty to hold a separate enquiry and to take cognizance thereafter. Under the new Code, however, such a procedure was eliminated by virtue of the amended provisions of Section 209 which made it quite clear that when in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate who is of the view that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall, after complying with the provisions of Sections 207 and 208, as the case may be, commit the accused to the Court of Session. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . by which the Court of Session could join a new person as accused. It was held that there is no intermediary stage between committal under Section 209 Cr.P.C. and Section 319Cr.P.C. for the aforesaid purpose. 11. Mr. Mishra submitted that the views expressed in Ranjit Singh's case (supra) were contrary to those expressed by this Court in the case of Kishun Singh Ors. vs. State of Bihar, [(1993) 2 SCC 16], where, although, 20 persons had been named in the F.I.R., the Magistrate had committed 18 to the Court of Session under Section 209 Cr.P.C. to stand trial. On an application made under Section 319 Cr.P.C. indicating the involvement of the other two accused as well, a prayer was made that they should also be summoned and arraigned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ews expressed by different Benches of this Court, the case was directed to be heard by a three Judge Bench. After considering the various decisions in connection with the said issue, the three Judge Bench observed that prima facie it did not think that the interpretation reached in Ranjit Singh's case (supra) was correct and that the law was clearly enunciated in Kishun Singh's case (supra). Further, having regard to the fact that the decision in Ranjit Singh's case (supra) was a three-Judge Bench, the learned Judges directed that the matter be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for placing the matter before a larger Bench. 14. Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned Senior Advocate appearing for some of the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... happened in the present case. In the instant case the investigation had been handed over to the C.I.D. and both the C.I.D. and the local police had submitted their reports in final form exonerating the petitioner of the allegations made against him in the F.I.R. However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, took cognizance of the offence under Section 302/379 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act against the petitioner. This is not a case where the Magistrate took recourse to any further inquiry but took cognizance on the police report itself, which he was entitled to do under Section 190(1)(b)Cr.P.C. 17. Even otherwise, the Petitioner thereafter filed an application for discharge before the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Siw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
