Om Prakash, A. N. Chaturvedi, JJ.

1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. Keep it on the record.

2. Heard Mr. Madan Mohan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Choudhary, the learned Additional P. P. for the State.

3. It appears that Sikarpur P. S. Case No.29, dated 13th March, 1981 under different sections of the Indian Penal Code was registered on the basis of F. I. R. lodged by one Raj Kishore Prasad, Superintendent of Excise, West Champaran, Bettiah (Annexure-4 ). Police held investigat ion and submitted charge sheet against four persons showing petitioner yamuna Pathak and some others as not sent up) Annexure-5 ).

4. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, looked into the case diary and in his order dated 6-7-1985, he found and held that "the case diary does not contain material to summon them" i. e. petitioner Yamuna pathak and some others. Accordingly, he discharged petitioner Yamuna pathak and some others after observing that "the I. O. has rightly not sent them" (Annexure-2 ).

5. It further appears that latter on, a "supplementary" chargesheet no.49, dated 17-3-1989 (Annexure-3) was submitted against p titione