1. The present Revision Application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short “the Code”) has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 20.05.2013 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in S.T. No. 182 of 2011 whereby and whereunder the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of the Code for his discharge has been rejected.

2. The petitioner has been made accused in Sakchi P.S. case no.106 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case no. 1059 of 2008 for the offence under Sections 307/353/427/109/120(B)/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 27/35 of Arms Act. In the petition filed in Court below under Section 227 of the Code, the grounds taken were that the petitioner was in jail custody between 12.02.2008 and 17.08.2008 in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No. 240 of 2007 on the allegation of murder of one Ashish Dey, the Proprietor of Shree Leather, Jamshedpur. Since he was in custody on the alleged date 16.05.2008, he had not taken part in the alleged occurrence and has been falsely implicated almost after two years of occurrence though the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons. Subsequent to the filing of present case, the petitioner has been convicted under Section 302 of I.P.C. in Sakchi P.S. Case no. 240 of 2007 and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life vide judgment dated 17.09.2011 passed in S.T. No. 227 of 2008.

3. In the present case ( Sakchi P.S. Case No. 106 of 2008), the first information report was lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of one Uday Singh, a Constable deputed at the house of late Ashish Day, the proprietor of Shree Leather, alleging therein that on 16.05.2008 at about 6:45 a.m., the informant was collecting water from the tap situated near the guard room of the house of Late Ashish Dey when all on a sudden, four miscreants riding on two motorcycles came there from Agrasen Bhawan side and made indiscriminate firing pointing upon the police party and fled away. The nearby shop owners, the police guard posted there and other persons assembled there also noticed the miscreants and they could identify them. The miscreants had fired seven rounds from small fire arms. The pellets and empty cartridges were recovered by the informant. The informant suspects that as the murder case of late Ashish Dey was in progress, so to create terror under conspiracy, the miscreants have committed this offence. After due investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet against some of the miscreants but the investigation was kept pending against this petitioner and other accused persons and almost after two years, supplementary charge sheet was submitted on 31.03.2011 against this petitioner. The Court of C.J.M. took cognizance of the offence against this petitioner and other accused, who were absconding and committed the case to the Court of Sessions where the petition under Section 227 of the Code was filed for discharge of the petitioner.

4. Mr. Tripathi, learned senior counsel, has taken the Court through various portion and paragraphs of the case diary relying upon which the Court below rejected the petition for discharge and submitted that on mere perusal of those paragraphs of the case diary, it would appear that the petition for discharge has been rejected without appreciating the contents of the paragraphs. It was also submitted that there is absolutely nothing in those paragraphs of the case diary to show any meeting of mind or hatching the criminal conspiracy by this petitioner when admittedly he was in jail custody on the alleged date of occurrence. It was further submitted that merely on suspicion, as he has been convicted in the murder case of late Ashish Dey, he has been shown as a conspirator, but from the entire materials available on record, there is neither any direct nor indirect evidence to show the complicity of this petitioner in any part of the conspiracy in opening fire upon the informant and other po