J.P.Singh, J.

1. This is an application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code) It is directed against the order dated 23.8.1995 passed in Criminal Revision No. 314/94 by 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Patna by which he set aside the order dated 18.4.1994 passed by Shri R.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Danapur in Tr. No. 728/94, G.R. No. 1822/82. By the aforesaid order dated 18.4.1994 the learned Magistrate had rejected a petition filed by the Additional Public Prosecutor to grant him time to go up in revision against his order dated 5.1.1994.

2. From the record, it appears that one Ram Somari Devi had filed a complaint petition in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur alleging therein that the accused-persons had abducted Her husband, Brij Nandan Singh, on 5.5.1984 and got certain forget and fabricated documents executed by him while he was under the influence of some drug administered to him. Subsequently, Brij Nandan Singh returned back on 8.5.1984 and fell ill on 20.5.1984. Some of the accused-persons again took Brij Nandan Singh to Patna for treatment where he died. On the receipt of this complaint petition, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur by his order dated 16.10.1984 directed the Officer Incharge, Bikram Police Station to institute a case and to submit final form. Accordingly, Bikram P.S. Case No. 374/84 was registered against 12 persons under various sections and the charge-sheet was submitted on 30.4.1990 after a long delay about 6 years. The cognizance was taken on 25.6.1990 against the accused-persons named in the charge-sheet. One of them, namely, Budhdeo Singh, filed an application under Section 482 of the Code (Cr. Misc. No. 12541/92) before this Court for quashing the order dated 30.2.1992 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate by which the prayer of the accused for discharge was rejected. The aforesaid criminal misc. case was placed under the heading for admission before Hon ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha on 22.10.1992 which was dismissed with a direction to the Court below to dispose of this case as early as possible preferably within two months from the date of receipt of the order (Annexure-1).

3. The copy of this order was received by the trial Court on 17.11.1992 and the charges were framed against the accused-persons on 24.2.1993. When on the date fixed for recording of evidence no prosecution witness appeared, the Additional Public Prosecutor prayed for issue of summons to be given to him for service at his risk. Thereafter, several dates were fixed and bailable warrants of arrest were also issued against the witness. No witness, however, could be produced till 21.8.1993 and the trial Court fixed 28.9.1993 as a last date for the production of the witnesses. On this date, one witness was produced. The rial, however, could not make much progress on account of the fact that the witnesses were produced in a piece-meal manner. The trial Court directed the Additional Public Prosecutor to examine all the witnesses by 21.12.1993 in view of the order passed by the Hon ble High Court as contained in Annexure-1. Finally, the case was adjourned to 5.1.1994. Even on this date neither any witness was produced nor any document was filed. The prosecution filed a petition for the issue of Dasti summons for the production of the witnesses. This petition of the prosecution was rejected by the learned trial Court by the order dated 5.1.1994 and the evidence of the prosecution was closed.

4. Against this order passed by Shri A.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Danapur a petition was filed by the prosecution for staying the further proceeding in the case since the State wanted to go up in revision against the order dated 5.1.1994. The learned Magistrate granted time till 26.2.1994. On this date the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a petition along with a certificate from the Advocate that a revision petition