Remanded

Bisheshwar Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Dec 2015Cr.Rev./978/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In revision, the High Court of Jharkhand set aside a non-speaking order rejecting a discharge petition, remitting the matter for a speaking order where the trial court must record satisfaction on whether a prima facie case exists.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 13.07.2015 was set aside and the matter remanded to the Magistrate Court to pass a speaking order after hearing.

Bisheshwar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.Rev.NO.978 of 2015

¶2

Bisheshwar Ram, s/o late Palo Ram, r/o Kumhar Patti, Maniatand, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad.

¶3

...Petitioner.

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ….... Opp.Party.

¶6

--CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA

¶7

----

¶8

For the Petitioner : M/s. J.Mazumdar & Rajesh Kumar, Advocates. For the State : APP .

¶9

03/07.12.2015 This revision is directed against the order 13.07.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Dhanbad in C.P.Case No.1428/2010 whereby petition for discharge filed by the petitioner under Section 245 Cr..C. Was rejected.

¶10

2 . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶11

It is evident that the trial court while rejecting the petition under Section 245 Cr.P.c has not considered or discussed the evidence on record to form an opinion that he was satisfied that a prima facie case is made out for framing charge. For better appreciation it would be necessary to re-produce the order dated 13.07.2015 which reads as under:-

¶12

“It appears from the perusal of the record that a petition under Section 245 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the accused person of dated 21.04.2015 and no rejoinder was filed against this petition by the other side. It appears that the complainant was examined on b/c evidence. So, there is sufficient materials available on record to frame charge against the accused person. So, I am not inclined to allow the petition under Section 245 Cr.P.C. dated 21.04.2015. Accordingly the petition dated 21.04.2015 u/S 245 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected and the case is fixed for framing charge.”

¶13

It is well settled that at the stage of hearing on the point of charge the court or the Magistrate is not required to weigh the pros and cons of the evidence meticulously as required during trial, however, the court can sift and weigh the evidence for the limited purpose to form an opinion whether the evidence on record reasonably connects the accused to the alleged crime. That satisfaction has to be recorded by the court for putting the accused on trial for the said offence or charge.

¶14

As noticed above, the learned trial court has not discussed the material evidence on record to form its opinion for satisfying itself as to under which section of IPC, prima facie case is made out to proceed against the accused and has passed a very cryptic and non-speaking order which is reflective of non-application of judicial mind. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is not sustainable and is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the court below to pass a speaking order on the basis of the materials available on record after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶15

With the said observation and direction the revision is hereby disposed of.

¶16

(Amitav K. Gupta, J.)

¶17

Biswas./-

Bisheshwar Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bisheshwar Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Shakil Alias Aman Singh Alias Appu Vs the State of Jharkhand

S Mumtaz Ahmad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santlal Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Department of Building Construction and Ors.

Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Asha Kumari Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Girja Yadav Vs State of Jharkhand