Disposed

Priya Ranjan Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Oct 2021W.P.(Cr.)/41/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench allowed an interim application regarding a procedural defect in the petition. Subsequently, the High Court directed the Executive Magistrate, Ranchi, to dispose of a long-pending petition filed under section 147 Cr.P.C. within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent no. 2 to dispose of Misc. Case No. 1790 of 2018 within six weeks.

Priya Ranjan Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr) No. 41 of 2021

¶3

Priya Ranjan Bhagat aged about 60 years, son of late Ranjit Lal Bhagat by profession Advocate, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi, resident of “ Nand Bhawan” Vishnu Cinema Road, Old Commissioners Compound, P.O., G.P.O., P.S. Daily Market, District-Ranchi

¶4

…… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1.The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Executive Magistrate, Sadar at Ranchi, P.O.+P.S. and District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Mukul Bhagat, son of late Santosh Lal Bhagat, resident of “ Nand Bhawan” Vishnu Cinema Road, Old Commissioners Compound, P.O., G.P.O., P.S. Daily Market, District-Ranchi …… Respondents

¶8

---------

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶10

For the Petitioner : In person. For the State : Mr. Suraj Verma, Spl. P.P.

¶11

07/Dated: 07/10/2021

¶12

I.A. No. 3787 of 2021 has been filed for ignoring defect No. 9 (iv). In para 4 of the said I.A., it has been stated that the case was listed before the learned court below and even no date was fixed and no order has been provided to the petitioner.

¶13

In view of such averments, I.A. No. 3787 of 2021 is allowed. Accordingly, defect no. 9(iv) is ignored. So far other surviving defect is concerned, counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the said defect during course of the day.

¶14

Heard the petitioner in person and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned counsel for the State.

¶15

This petition has been filed for direction upon the respondent no. 2 to dispose of Misc. Case No. 1790 of 2018 preferred by the petitioner under section 147 Cr.P.C. pending before the Court of Mrs. Shweta Vaid, learned Executive Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶16

The petitioner appearing in person submits that the petitioner

¶17

has filed petition before the concerned court under section 147 Cr.P.C. on 16.11.2018. On the same day report was called from the concerned Circle Officer and the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police Station. He submits

¶18

¶19

that by order dated 29.11.2018, it has been disclosed that no report was received from the Office of Senior Superintendent of Police nor from the Circle Officer. On 13.12.2018, reminder was sent to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and the Circle Officer, Town by the concerned Court. He submits that the opposite party no.3 did not appear nor report was received. He submits that the matter was adjourned on 31.01.2019. 08.03.2019, 29.03.2019, 12.04.2019, , 26.04.2019, 10.05.2019, 01.06.2019, 19.06.2019, 02.07.2019, 31.07.2019, 14.08.2019, 20.08.2019, 20.09.2019, 10.10.2019, 05.11.2019, 28.11.2019, 19.12.2019, 17.01.2020, 31.01.2020, 19.02.2020, 05.03.2020 thereafter, the case was adjourned for 25.03.2020, 11.06.2020, 16.10.2020, 11.11.2020 and lastly on 01.12.2020.

¶20

Section 147 Cr.P.C. is meant for an emergent situation and court is required to dispose of the petition at the earliest. But inspite of several adjournments, final order has not been passed.

¶21

Mr. Suraj Verma, learned counsel for the State submits that direction may kindly be issued by this Court to the respondent no. 2 to dispose of the petition.

¶22

In view of above facts and considering the fact that the petition filed by the petitioner is pending before the concerned court since long, the writ petition is being disposed of directing the respondent no. 2- the Executive Magistrate, Sadar at Ranchi to dispose of the Misc. Case No. 1790 of 2018 filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶23

With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶25

Satyarthi/-

Priya Ranjan Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya Ranjan Bhagat 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

Om Prakash Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sarvan Zindal Alias Sarvan Kumar Zindal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Mohnani Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anjali Anand Vs the State of Jharkhand

Navin Gautam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nurulla Khan Alias Guddu Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand