Allowed

Umesh Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC4 Dec 2012CR. MISC./20841/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated against petitioners. Court accepted argument that a prior FIR by Petitioner No. 4 on the same facts was filed to manufacture a defense, noting the present case was instituted two days after the alleged occurrence.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 13.06.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 153C/2011 and the entire proceeding were quashed and the application was allowed.

Umesh Prasad and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 20841 of 2012

¶2

=================================================== 1. Umesh Prasad, Son of Shivjee Mahto.

¶3

Mahesh Prasad, Son of Shivjee Mahto.

¶4

Ranjeet Prasad, Son of Umesh Prasad.

¶5

Raju Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar, Son of Umesh Prasad. 5. Nitish Kumar, Son of Umesh Prasad. All resident of Village-Muzafara, P.S.-Ishlampur, Dist.-Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

Sakuna Devi, Wife of Brindra Prasad, Resident of VillageMozafara, P.S.-Ishlampur, Dist.-Nalanda.

¶8

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶9

===================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER

¶11

04. 04.12.2012 No one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party

¶12

No. 2 on the second successive dates.

¶13

The Petitioners seek quashing of entire

¶14

proceeding including the order dated 13.06.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 153C/2011 by which the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Hilsa, Nalanda has taken cognizance in the matter.

¶15

The case of the Complainant is that the accused persons forcibly entered into her house and assaulted her and also committed theft from the house.

¶16

It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that for the same cause of action the Petitioner No. 4 had filed Ishlampur P.S. Case No. 40/11 against the husband of the Complainant in which charge-sheet has been submitted against him and other accused

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20841 of 2012 (4) dt.04-12-2012

¶18

¶19

persons and the present case has been instituted two days after the alleged occurrence which appears to have been done for creating a defence.

¶20

Having gone through the records of the case, I am inclined to accept the submission raised on behalf of the Petitioners and, hence, proceed to quash the entire proceeding including the order dated 13.06.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 153C/2011 by the Judicial

¶21

Magistrate, 1^st Class, Hilsa, Nalanda .

¶22

The application stands allowed.

¶23

Let this order be communicated through FAX at

¶24

the cost of the Petitioners.

¶25

(Anjana Prakash, J.)

¶26

Vikash/-

Umesh Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Prasad and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Natural Dairy Private Limited and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Abdul Matin Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Ajab Narayan Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Manoj Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sneh Lata Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.