Dismissed

Samad @ Abdus Samad and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC30 Jul 2012CR. MISC./39744/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed an application under Criminal Miscellaneous No.39744/2011 seeking to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate taking cognizance against them under the Indian Penal Code for alleged offences. The High Court rejected the contention that judicial mind was not applied, found merit lacking, and disposed of the application. This court's decision is limited to quashing the dispu

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous application seeking quashing of the order of taking cognizance was dismissed. Petitioners allowed to raise points at charge framing.

Samad @ Abdus Samad and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39744 of 2011 (2) dt.30-07-2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.39744 of 2011

¶3

====================================================== 1. Samad @ Abdus Samad, son of Nasir Jagi, R/O Ganj, PS,Janki Nagar,District-Purnea. 2. [email protected] Hussain, son of Gusul, R/O Jagi Ganj,PS,Janki Nagar,Distt-Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadimul Hasan, Advocae. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar No.I, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 30-07-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶5

This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 14.1.2011 passed in Bhargama P.S. Case No. 108 of 2006, G.R. No. 2008 of 2006 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria by which he has taken cognizance against the petitioners under sections 341, 342, 323, 325, 307, 452, 302 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the court below has not applied its judicial mind and even taken cognizance against those persons against whom no chargesheet has been filed and the order does not disclose the application of mind. He further submits that there is omnibus

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39744 of 2011 (2) dt.30-07-2012

¶8

allegation against them and there is no specific allegation against the petitioners.

¶9

At the stage of taking cognizance the court is only required to see the prima facie case and it also shows that the court below has applied its judicial mind and this proposition

¶10

has been considered by the Hon’ble

¶11

Supreme Court in the case of Bhushan Kumar Vs. N.C.T., Delhi, reported in 2012 (2) P.L.J.R. 422.

¶12

In this view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in this application. However, the petitioners will be at liberty to raise all the points before the court below at the time of framing of charge. If such an application is filed by the petitioners, the court below will pass an order in accordance with law.

¶13

With the aforesaid observation this application is dismissed.

¶14

Vinay/-

¶15

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

Samad @ Abdus Samad and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samad @ Abdus Samad and Anr. v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bindu Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Shipra Barnwal and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Sri Ramjee Prasad and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Diwakar Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar

Virendra Kumar Ray Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Umesh Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.