JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Shekhar Pd. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned counsel for the State.

2. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent these matters have been heard.

3. The present petition has been filed for quashing of order dated 03.07.2019 passed in G.R. Case No. 2735 of 2018 whereby the learned Court has committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

4. Mr. Shekhar Pd. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without complying sections 207 and 208 Cr.P.C., straightway order has been passed under section 209 Cr.P.C.

5. Mr. Suraj Verma, learned counsel for the State submits that so far section 208 Cr.P.C. is concerned, that is for the complaint case otherwise than on the police report. He submits that since this case arises out of F.I.R., section 208 Cr.P.C. is not applicable. He further submits that section 207 Cr.P.C. speaks about supply of copy of police report and other document to the accused. He submits that the trial court has taken care of and directed the concerned P.P. to provide documents to the accused. He further submits that this aspect of the matter has been considered by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of “Birendra Sahani V. The State of Bihar” reported in 2006 (2) PLJR 256.

6. On perusal of section 208 Cr.P.C., it is crystal clear that it applies in a case instituted otherwise than on a police report. The case in hand has been instituted on the police report. Section 207 Cr.P.C. provides for supply of copy of police report and other document. The concerned Court has taken care of by way of directing to the P.P. to supply document to the accused. This aspect of the matter has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Birendra Sahani (supra)wherein para 6 & 8 it has been held as under:-

“6. It is too much to say that the Magistrate is required to prepare the copies and serve upon the accused. In fact, it is the duty of the prosecutor i.e. State Government to prepare as many copies equal to the number of the accused and produce the same in the Court so that on Day-1 or immediately after filing of the charge-sheet the copies are supplied either personally to the accused persons or to their respective counsel to avoid unnecessary delay. It also goes without saying that the documents which are referred in Section 207 Cr.P.C. are required to be served by the prosecution agency upon the accused.

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

8. The practice, as submitted by Mr. Yadav, it is being followed in the Courts then this is illegal. It is the duty of the prosecution agency to serve as many copies in the Court, of the documents which are referred in Section 207 Cr.P.C., so that the copies are supplied immediately. When the prosecution agency is preparing a charge-sheet then nothing stops it from making the copies on the very same day and submit the same in the Court alongwith the charge-sheet.”

In view of the aforesaid facts, no relief can be extended to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed.