ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The Appellant/Accused herein is being charged and prosecuted for commission of offences alleged to have been committed by him under Sections 500, 504 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'Indian Penal Code').

3. The Complaint Case No. 391 of 1999 was filed by Respondent No. 2-Dharam Raj Tiwari, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamu, Daltonganj, on 28.6.1999. According to the complaint filed by Respondent No. 2, the date and time of incidents have been mentioned between 3.11.1998 and 25.6.1999.

4. Admittedly, soon after the alleged incident, Respondent No. 2/Complainant did not lodge any First Information Report (for short 'FIR') with the Police Station. There is nothing on record to suggest or show that Respondent No. 2/Complainant took any steps to get the said FIR recorded by the Superintendent of Police of the District. Then, he waited for good three days and lodged the complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, as mentioned hereinabove. Perusal thereof shows that according to him, the alleged offences were committed by Appellant/Accused between 3.11.1998 and 25.6.1999, repeatedly, yet for the reasons best known to the Respondent No. 2/Complainant, he did not take any steps to lodge the FIR on an earlier date. No reason in this regard has been assigned before us by him.

5. It appears to us that only after the alleged incident, which took place on 25.6.1999, the Respondent No. 2/Complainant thought it fit to submit his complaint before the Magistrate. In the said complaint, it is mentioned that on several previous occasions, Appellant/Accused had used abusive language against them and was in the habit of throwing memorandum and copies of the orders passed by High Court and this Court on their faces. It is further alleged in the complaint that on the date of the incident, Appellant/Accused, in a fit of anger, threw a paper-weight on the Respondent No. 2/Complainant which had hit him on his right toe.

6. Admittedly, Respondent No. 2/Complainant did not get himself medically examined nor there was any Medical Report to suggest that he had sustained any such injury.

7. Since the complaint was filed and preliminary evidence of certain witnesses were recorded, the Magistrate found sufficient prima facie material on record and therefore, directed issuance of summons to the Appellant/Accused. Appellant/Accused also filed an Application before the Magistrate on the ground that no prior sanction has been obtained from the Government to prosecute him as at the relevant point of time he was holding the post of Executive Engineer (Irrigation), and thereby, prayed for the proceedings to be dropped. The said Application came to be rejected by the Magistrate on 24.3.2004.

8. It is relevant to mention here that at the relevant point of time, Appellant was working and holding the post of Executive Engineer (Irrigation) and the present Respondent No. 2/Complainant was working under him on the post of Accounts Clerk, Grade-III.

9. It is also pertinent to mention here that on account of order issued by Government of Bihar, process for reversion of those employees who were wrongly absorbed from the Work Charge Establishment to Regular Establishment, had already commenced with effect from 3.11.1998. The Respondent No. 2/Complainant was very well aware of the fact that after the completion of all the other formalities required in this regard, an order of reversal would be passed against him by the Appellant who at the relevant point of time was working as Executive Engineer (Irrigation). Between the period 3.11.1998 and 4.7.1999, there were several correspondence between the Superintendent Engineer and Chief Engineer and Government showing thereby that all those employees who have wrongly been absorbed on Regular Establishment have got to be reverted to the substantive posts. This fact was very well known to the Complainant and all other such employees who were working under the Appellant in that Establishment