JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 8.9.2009 by which the Court below has issued warrant of arrest against the named accused persons in Simri Police. Station Case No. 136 of 2009. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is a Constable posted at Patna, petitioner no. 2 is an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police posted at Arki Police Station in Jharkhand; whereas petitioner no. 3 is a student of Patna Central School, and his date of birth has been mentioned by the School authorities as 18th July, 1997 which would make him about 12 years of age on the date of the occurrence. 4. The allegation against the petitioners 1 and 2 is that they had conspired with the other named accused persons to commit the offence of murder. The allegation against petitioner no. 3 is that he was present at the time of the occurrence and ran away with the motorcycle. 5. The case was filed on 6.9.2009. The requisition for issuance of warrant of arrest was filed in the Court below by the Officer-in-charge on 7.9.2009 and the order was passed by the Court below on 8.9.2009. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioners relies on a decision of this Court in the case of Randhir Sharma @ Rupesh V/s. The State of Bihar & Others, 2009(2) BBCJ 258 . In the case aforesaid, this Court while discussing the provisions of Section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has concluded on the basis of several decisions that "(a) The warrant of arrest should not ordinarily be issued in utter haste, (b) It may not be issued in aid of investigation, and (c) the Police should make an attempt to arrest the accused at his correct address and if the accused is not found at his address or is evading arrest, a requisition can be filed for issuance of warrant of arrest against such person". 7. In the present case, the only fact which may be considered is that the requisition has been filed within two days of the occurrence. 7. In the present case, the only fact which may be considered is that the requisition has been filed within two days of the occurrence. It is submitted that as far as petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, they are said to be the conspirators and the factum of conspiracy can only be determined by the investigation and as such this Court finds that the warrant has been issued in great haste. 8. In the facts aforesaid, the order dated 8.9.2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in Simri Police Station Case No. 136 of 2009 is hereby quashed. Any consequential orders as a result of the order dated 8.9.2009 shall automatically be quashed as well. 9. However, this order would not mean that warrant of arrest cannot be issued if the Investigating Officer files a fresh requisition giving grounds for issuance of warrant of arrest against the petitioners. 10. In the result, this application is allowed.