ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, J.:–By filing the instant application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short „Cr.P.C.?), the petitioners have challenged the order dated 01.10.2012 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ara in Tr. No.3577 of 2012 arising out of Ara (M) P.S.Case No. 49 of 2010, by which the petition dated 13.03.2012 filed under section 239 of the Cr.P.C. for discharge has been rejected.

2. Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 49 of 2010 was registered on the basis of self written report of Lal Bihari Paswan, Officer-in-Charge, Ara Muffasil Police Station against the petitioners under sections 25(1-B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act. According to the allegations made in the First Information Report, on the basis of statement of petitioner no.1 Madan Rai, Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 39 of 2010 was registered under sections 341, 384, 354, 379 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as 25(1-B) (a), 26 and 27 of the Arms Act against one Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu and others. During the course of investigation, the police found the case to be false. It was found that due to previous enmity the petitioners had actually beaten up Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu severely and upon realizing that his injuries were serious and life threatening, in a bid to save themselves, they gave their own pistol and cartridges to the village Chowkidar and alleged that it had been recovered from Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu. As stated in the FIR, the Supervising Officer of Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 39 of 2010 has directed for institution of a case against the petitioners, pursuant to which the case has been instituted.

3. In order to appreciate the facts of the present case, it would be proper to take note of the facts of Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 39 of 2010 first. On the basis of written report submitted by petitioner no.1 Madan Rai, Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 39 of 2010 dated 01.03.2010 was registered under sections 341, 384, 354, 379 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as 25(1-B) (a), 26 and 27 of the Arms Act against one Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu, his elder brother Krishna Yadav and five other unknown persons. On that day at about 7.00 p.m., while he was going together with his wife Munni Devi to his sister?s house, his co-villager Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu along with five others started teasing his wife. When he protested, the accused Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu started abusing him and said that earlier also he had demanded Rs.20,000/- from him which had not been paid as yet. He threatened that he would ruin his life and took away Rs.1100/- from his pocket.

4. It has further been alleged that petitioner no.1 Madan Rai came back to his house. When his father came to know about the incident, he went to the house of the co-villager Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu to complain. On hearing the complaint, Pankaj?s elder brother Krishna Yadav got infuriated and said that if he has to live in the village, he will have to pay rangdari. Thereafter, Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu along with his associates came to the house of the petitioner Madan Rai. He also made firing from his pistol. It has further been alleged that on hearing the sound of firing, petitioner Madan Rai and his family members ran towards their house but the accused persons chased them away and entered the house. They abused and assaulted them and snatched his mother?s gold chain. However, while retreating, Pankaj Kumar Singh @ Guddu fell down and he was caught. In the meantime, village Chowkidar also arrived at the place of occurrence. In course of search one country made pistol and two .315 bore cartridges were recovered from his possession, which were handed over to the village Chowkidar, who presented the same at the police station.

5. It is important to note here that another FIR being Ara Muffasil P.S.Case No. 40 of 2010 was instituted on the basis of oral statement of Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Guddu Yadav in respect of the occurrence which took place on 01.03.2010 at 7.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document