This judgment dismissed a petition seeking quashing of orders rejecting a discharge application and a subsequent revision under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court held that when a prima facie case is made out in the FIR, a discharge order is not maintainable.
Petition dismissed with directions to vacate any interim orders.
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.
1 Cr.M.P. No. 1344 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1344 of 2012
-Versus-
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Srivastava, A.P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Prabhash Kumar, Advocate
Srivastava, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Prabhash Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
2
Cr.M.P. No. 1344 of 2012
others reached to the forest area and attempted to encroach the portion of forest by using the said JCB machine and they also slapped the forest guards.
3
Cr.M.P. No. 1344 of 2012
out a case of commission of an offence, there cannot be an order of discharge and that has been observed on the basis of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajbir v. State; (AIR 2006 SC 1963) . It is well settled that when a prima facie case is made out, discharge petition is not fit to be allowed. The learned trial court as well as the revisional court have taken note of that and, thereafter, passed the orders. Moreover, there is no illegality in the impugned orders and in the garb of Section 482 Cr.P.C., second revision is not maintainable. Hence, no relief can be extended to the petitioners.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is maintainable when the High Court has already decided the main question of law.
Whether an order dismissing an application for discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. is bad in law when the FIR establishes a prima facie case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajbir v. StateRelied on¶21
Rajbir v. State; (AIR 2006 SC 1963) · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Manoj Singh
Aditya Ojha
Jai Bhagatiya
The State of Jharkhand
Raj Kumar
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
