Petitioner sought quashing of a lower court order refusing to delete sections 420 and 34 IPC. The High Court found no error in that order and dismissed the application.
Application for quashing was dismissed.
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.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12018 of 2011 (3) dt.17-07-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.12018 of 2011
======================================================
1. Vijay Srivastava @ Vijay Kumar Srivastava S/O Late Shambhu Nath
Sahay Resident Of Mohalla- Balughat, Police Station- Town, District-
Muzaffarpur
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 17-07-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
This application has been filed for quashing the order
dated 12.2.2011 passed in Town Police Station Case No.420
of 2009, Tr. No.3826 of 2010 by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist
Class, Muzaffarpur by which the court below has refused to
delete section 420 read with section 34 of the Indian penal
Code.
It appears from the record that the police on a secret
information raided premises from where objectionable
materials were recovered. An application was filed that no
case is made out under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code
but the court below has refused to entertain the submission
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12018 of 2011 (3) dt.17-07-2012
and rejected the petition by the impugned order recording the fact that there are sufficient materials on record for the aforesaid section.
This Court does not find any error in the impugned order. Accordingly this application is dismissed.
Vinay/-
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order refusing to delete sections 420 and 34 IPC for lack of case made out was correct.
Whether there were any errors in the lower court refusing to entertain the submission that no case is made out.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Srivastava @ Vijay Kumar Srivastava
The State Of Bihar
Shivaji Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
