IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.1030 of 2012

======================================================

1. The State Of Bihar, Through, District Magistrate, Siwan

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Md. Shahabuddin, S/O Sheikh Hasibullah, resident of Village Pratap

Pur, P.S. Hussainganj, District Siwan, at Present convicted prisoner in

Siwan Jail.

2. Rajkumar Sah, S/O Triloki Sah, resident of Kasera Toli, P.S. Siwan

Town, District Siwan.

3. Munna Mian @ Sonu @ Arif Hussain, S/O Maqbool Hussain, resident

of Village Tetaria, P.S. Hussainganj, District Siwan.

4. Shaikh Aslam, S/O Shaikh Saliq, resident of Kaseratoli, P.S. Siwan

Town, District Siwan.

.... .... Opposite party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.Dayal

For the Opp. Party No.1 : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate

Ms.Fauzia Shakil, Advocate

For Opp. Party Nos. 2 to4 : Mr.Shoeb Alam, Advocate

Mr. Humaya A. Khan, Advocate

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA

C.A.V. ORDER

5

18-12-2012

Whether a petition filed under Section 216 of the Code

of Criminal procedure, 1973 ( for short >Cr.P.C.?) seeking addition

or alteration of charge against the accused can be rejected

summarily merely on the ground of delay, without considering the

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1030 of 2012 (5) dt.18-12-2012

2 / 16

2

prayer on merit by examining and scrutinizing the materials

available on the record, is the central issue requiring determination

by this Court in the present proceeding.

2. Material facts relevant for deciding the present

proceeding are not in dispute. One Kalawati Devi lodged a

criminal case on 16.8.2004 with allegations that her two sons,

namely, Girish Kumar alias Niku and Satish Kumar alias Sonu

have been assaulted by the accused persons and both of them have

been abducted in order to murder them. It was also alleged that

shops situate near the bus stand were put on fire. On the basis of

the aforesaid Fardbeyan, Siwan Mofassil P.S.Case No. 131 of

2004 dated 16.8.2004 under Sections 341,323,380,435 and 364/34

of the Indian Penal Code was instituted by the police and

investigation was taken up. Indisputably, on close of investigation,

charge sheet was submitted against the accused opposite party

nos.1 to 4 for offences under Sections 341,323,380,436,364 and

120-B of the Indian penal Code. After cognizance being taken, the

case was committed to the court of Sessions for trial of the

accused persons, giving rise to Sessions Trial No. 158 of 2010.

3. Suffice is to state that charges were framed against

the accused opposite parties on 4.6.2010. So far accused-opposite

party nos.1 to 4 are concerned, they have been charged under

Sections 364-A and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. However,

Opposite party nos. 2 to 4 have further been charged for offences

under Sections 341,323,364, 364-A, 436 and 380 of the Indian

Penal Code. Admittedly, recording of evidence of P.Ws.

commenced on 1.7.2010 and altogether ten prosecution witnesses

were examined till 26.8.2011. After close of the prosecution

evidence, and complying with the mandatory requirements under

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1030 of 2012 (5) dt.18-12-2012

3 / 16

3

Cr.P.C., arguments commenced for disposal of the aforesaid

Sessions Trial No. 158 of 2010. While the arguments were still

continuing, on 9.8.2012 a petition under Section 216 Cr.P.C. was

filed on behalf of the prosecution with a prayer for addition of

charges under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 120-B of the

Indian Penal Code against the accused-opposite parties. It is the

case of the prosecution that in view of evidence of P.Ws.,

particularly on the basis of evidence of