JUDGMENT

Rajesh Shankar, J. - The present criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.05.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate,1st Class, Seraikella, whereby the cognizance of offences under Sections 147,148,435,307 and 302/149 of the IPC has been taken against the petitioners. Further prayer has been made for quashing the proceeding subsequent to the said order taking cognizance in connection with G.R. No.34/2004 arising out of Complaint Case No.C1-9/04, pending in the court of Sri A. Lal, Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella.

2. Complaint Case No.C1-9/2004 has been filed by the opposite party No.2 alleging, inter alia, that the complainant is the owner of one Tata Spacio Vehicle bearing registration No.JH-05D-7040, which was used to carry staff of S.B.I. and Civil Court from Jamshedpur to Seraikella and back. On many occasions, the vehicle was used by the S.B.I., Seraikella to bring and remit huge cash amount to other branches of the bank. Being aware of the above facts, the petitioners told the helper- Bahadur Mahato and the driver- Pawan Mahato to stop the vehicle at specified place on the signal for the purpose of plundering the cash amount, but they refused to do so due to which the petitioners threatened the driver and helper of the vehicle of the complainant with dire consequence. On 14.01.2004, the vehicle of the opposite party No.2 was taken to village Bandhdih by driver Pawan Mahato, helper Bahadur Mahato, his uncle Chinibas Mahato and Shankar Mahato where Chinibas Mahato was to meet his brother-in-law.

As soon as the vehicle stopped near the house of Bindu Mahato brother-in-law of Chinibas Mahato, the petitioners surrounded the vehicle and dragged Bahadur Mahato out of the vehicle. The petitioners were armed with lathi and started assaulting him mercilessly causing several injuries on his person. When Chinibas Mahato went to save Bahadur Mahato, he was also brutally assaulted. Pawan Mahato and Shankar Mahato fled away on seeing the petitioners assaulting Bahadur Mahato and his uncle. The petitioners murdered Bahadur Mahato and caused serious injury to Chinibas Mahato. The petitioners also set fire Tata Spacio vehicle of the opposite party No.2. For the alleged incident two first information reports were lodged. Firstly Seraikella P.S Case No.3 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No.33 of 2004 was lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of the Bijay Mahato (petitioner No.1) wherein after investigation the police submitted charge sheet under Section 147/149/323/307 of the Indian Penal Code, which ended in terms with the judgment dated 30.06.2011 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella holding accused Chunnu Mahato, Hiru Mahato, Shankar Mahato alias Shambhu Mahato, Pawan Mahato and Chinibas Mahato guilty of the offence under Sections 147 and 323 of IPC and they were released on probation bond of Rs.5000/- with one surety of like amount each under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to maintain peace and good behaviour for a period of one year. Another first information report being Seraikella P.S Case No.4 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No.34 of 2004, was registered on the basis of the self-recorded statement of the Sub-Inspector of Police, namely, Ashok Kumar wherein the police submitted final form under Sections 435,427,304,307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against unknown persons. It was alleged in the complaint filed by the opposite party No.2 that one of the injured witnesses, namely, Chinibas Mahato had disclosed the name of the petitioners before the police who were involved in the alleged crime, however, the same was ignored by the police while submitting final form.

3. The learned court below vide order dated 24.05.2006 took cognizance of the offences under Sections 147,148,435,307,302/149 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it has not been mentioned in the impugned order dated 24.5.2006 that the co