Allowed

Arvind Kumar and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC3 Jan 2013CR. MISC./1110/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an order of cognizance. The lower court had taken cognizance against petitioners for offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, and 341/34 IPC. The Court allowed the settlement and quashed the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside and the parties are allowed to compromise the matter.

Arvind Kumar and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1110 of 2012 (4) dt.03-01-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1110 of 2012

¶4

====================================================== 1. Arvind Kumar, S/o Ram Vilash Singh 2. Ram Vilas Singh, S/o Late Ram Ratan Singh

¶5

Suryakali Devi, W/o Ram Vilas Singh 4. Radha Raman Brajraj @ Pappu Kumar, S/o Ram Vilas Singh 5. Smt. Manju Brajraj @ Manju Kumari, W/o Radha Raman Brajraj

¶6

Arun Kumar, S/o Ram Vilash Singh

¶7

Ravi Prakash @ Guddu, S/o Ram Vilas Singh

¶8

All resident of Vill:- Belao, P.S. - Kaler, Distt. - Arwal and at present Resident of - Krishna Nagar, Tola - Ahari, P.S. & Distt. - Aurangabad.

¶9

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Usha Kumari, D/o Sri Lal Pd., Village - Bodhbigha, P.S. - Mahendia, Distt. - Arwal.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 03-01-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, State and the opposite party no. 2.

¶14

This petition is directed against the order dated 15.07.2011 passed by Sri Sanjay Singh, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No. 918 of 2009, Tr. No. 356 of 2011 whereby the learned court below took cognizance against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 and 341/34 of the Indian Penal Code and has issued process against the petitioners.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners and opposite party no. 2 have settled their dispute and Rs.6,50,000/- has already

¶16

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1110 of 2012 (4) dt.03-01-2013

¶17

been paid to the victim-wife in full and final settlement and they do not want to litigate the matter any further. Hence, in view of the settlement and agreement between the parties, the petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the parties are allowed to compromise.

¶18

(Gopal Prasad, J.)

¶19

Kundan/-

Arvind Kumar and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar 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

Chhathu Paswan @ Hemant Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Inwa Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Birendra Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Mannan Khan and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Kishan Kumar @ Kishun Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rahul Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar