Single judge disposed of an application for quashing a lower court order that accepted an F.R.T. without issuing notice. Directed the applicant to file a protest petition if complained about the F.R.T. acceptance.
Directions to file a protest petition against the F.R.T. if desired by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 2713 of 2014
Vinay Kumar Yadav @ Vinay Yadav son of Kripa Nand Yadav, resident of New Colony, Tungri, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Muffasil Chaibasa District Singhbhum East ... ... ...
District Singhbhum East ... ... ... Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Deepak Kumar Saw @ Deepak Kumar Prasad, son of Biru Saw, resident of Village-Hesalong, P.S. Giddi, P.O. Giddi, District Hazaribagh... ... ... Opp. Parties
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR
............
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
4/05.05.2015
This application has been filed by the informant for quashing the order dated 28.01.14, passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh in G.R. No. 39 of 2013, whereby, learned Magistrate took cognizance against co-accused Tarun Saw @ Tarun Prasad, but has not passed any order with respect to another coaccused Deepak Kumar Prasad @ Deepak Saw against whom police had submitted F.R. T.
Petitioner has no grievance against the order of cognizance against co-accused Tarun Saw @ Tarun Prasad. However learned counsel for petitioner submits that the learned court below had accepted F.R.T. filed in favour of co-accused Deepak Kumar Prasad @ Deepak Saw without giving notice to the petitioner. Thus part of the order of the learned court below is incorrect.
From perusal of the impugned order it appears that learned court below has not passed any order on the F.R.T. filed by the police. Thus if petitioner so desire may file protest petition against the F.R.T. If such protest petition filed the learned court below dispose of the same in accordance with law.
With the above observation and direction, this application is disposed of.
(Prashant Kumar, J.)
Binit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application under Section 482 CrPC must decide the allegation that notice was not given when accepting an F.R.T.
VINAY KUMAR YADAV @ VINAY YADAV
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
DEEPAK KUMAR SAW @ DEEPAK KUMAR PRASAD
PRASHANT KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
