High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an order without finding merit due to factual disputes not suitable for this stage., granting liberty to raise points at charge framing.
Petition dismissed; liberty granted to raise points before court below at charge framing.
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.13666 of 2011 (3) dt.24-07-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.13666 of 2011
====================================================== 1. Sri Ramjee Prasad S/O Late Baijnath Prasad, R/O Mohalla - Purani Chauk, Ward No. 19, Gopalganj, P.S. And District - Gopalganj 2. Laxman Prasad S/O Late Baijnath Prasad. R/O Mohalla - Purani Chauk, Ward No. 19, Gopalganj, P.S. And District - Gopalganj .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Dhaneesh Sah S/O Kailash Sah R/O Village - Bedua, P.S. - Kuchaikot , District - Gopalganj .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. J. Upadhyay CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 24-07-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. In this case, petitioners are challenging the order dated 24.1.2011. It has been alleged in the complaint petition that the complainant had planted the paddy crops and the petitioners had stealthily harvested his paddy crops causing loss of Rs. 3,000/-. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the land in question was purchased by their grand father in favour of Amrit Nath Mahadeo Mandir by the registered deed about 80 years ago from Nidhi Mahto. Dharichama is original land holder of the disputed land and the land was transferred to different hands.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13666 of 2011 (3) dt.24-07-2012
Ultimately, their grand father is the ultimate purchaser of the land.
The counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant is claiming the land through forged sale deed and he is not inoccupation of the land rather it is the petitioner who is in cultivating possession of the land.
These are the disputed facts which cannot be looked into at this stage. This Court does not find any merit in the present case. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to raise all the points before the court below at the time of framing of charge.
(Shivaji Pandey, J)
Mahesh/-
Sri Ramjee Prasad
Laxman Prasad
The State Of Bihar
Dhaneesh Sah
Shivaji Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
