Nakul Rana and Another vs State of Jharkhand

D.K. Sinha, J.—The petitioners Nakul Rana and Janki Rana have preferred this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the impugned order dated 9.2.2004 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 123 of 2003.

The main grievance of the petitioners is that though charges under various sections of Indian Penal Code were not framed against them on 31.3.2003 by the court of 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih, but their names have been incorporated in the format of charges on 9.2.2004 by deleting the names of other two persons, namely, Dhaneshwar Rana and Yamuna Rana and substituting their names Janki Rana and Nakul Rana by the charge u/s 147 of the Indian Penal Code, and separate charge under Sections 323, 341 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code besides independent charge against the petitioner Janki Rana for the offence u/s 325 of the Indian Penal Code by deleting the name of Dhaneshwar Rana as contained in the order impugned dated 9.2.2004, in mechanical manner without the said charges being read over and explained and ascertaining their consent as to whether they plead guilty or claimed to be tried which is contravention to the provisions of Sections 211, 212, 213 and 214 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The object of charge is to enable the accused to know the case they will have to meet and to be read before evidence is given and the accused is entitled to know with the greatest precision and particularity the offence said to have been committed and the section of the penal law infringed.

The impugned order dated 9.2.2004 reflects gross negligence, prima facie, and recklessness on the part of the trial judge in Sessions Trial No. 123 of 2003 wherein charges have been framed in different heads against such two persons, against whom neither charge-sheet was submitted by the police nor cognizance of the offence was taken by the committing court which appears illegal.

Under the circumstances, 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih is directed to send Xerox copies of the order sheets of his court as well as committing court, Xerox copy of charges framed and the carbon copy of the case diary in connection with Sessions Trial No. 123 of 2003 within ten days through special messenger. In the meantime, further proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 123 of 2003 shall remain stayed.

Put up this case under the same heading before the appropriate Bench on receipt of the aforesaid documents.