Disposed

Indu Devi and Ors. v. High Court Of Judicature At Patna Through Its Registrar General

Patna HC23 Aug 2013CR. WJC/392/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Patna High Court disposed of an application seeking quashing of orders passed in a criminal case arising out of Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 108A of 1994 involving allegedly pending non-bailable warrants and attachment processes against six petitioners who had been either acquitted or discharged. The Court directed the lower court to examine records thoroughly and pass due o

What did the court decide?

Directed the court below to examine records thoroughly and immediately pass due orders.

Indu Devi and Ors. Vs High Court Of Judicature… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.392 of 2013

¶2

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

¶3

Indu Devi, Wife of Sukumar Mandal.

¶4

Sukumar Mandal, Son of Amir Mandal.

¶5

Both resident of Village- Lagma, P.S.- Sangrampur, District- Munger.

¶6

Santosh Mandal.

¶7

Subhit Mandal.

¶8

Nand Lal Mandal.

¶9

Basuki Mandal.

¶10

All Sons of Late Dhamak Mandal @ Ghanshyam Mandal. All 3 to 6 are resident of Village- Khariya, P.S.- Bariyarpur, DistrictMunger.

¶11

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶12

Versus

¶13

High Court of Judicature at Patna, through its Registrar General.

¶14

The State of Bihar, through Superintendent of Police, Munger.

¶15

Civil Court, Munger, through its Registrar, Munger.

¶16

.... .... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER

¶18

6 23-08-2013 Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. None turned up on behalf of respondent no. 3 in spite of filing counter affidavit as early as on 16.05.2013.

¶19

2. This is an application seeking quashing of the orders dated 19.03.2005/07.05.2010 passed in Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 108A of 1994 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest and process of attachment etc. against six petitioners.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.392 of 2013 (6) dt.23-08-2013 2/4

¶21

3. Undisputedly, after completion of the investigation, the final form in the said case was submitted in different phases, wherein, initially the case of nonpetitioner Amir Mandal was committed to the court of sessions by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger on 07.07.1995 and since the investigation against remaining accused persons including the petitioners was pending, a supplementary record was opened.

¶22

4. Thereafter, the first supplementary record was committed to the court of sessions on 20.08.1998 with respect to petitioner nos.- 2, 3 & 5, namely, Sukumar Mandal, Santosh Mandal and Nand Lal Mandal, keeping the investigation pending against petitioner nos.- 1, 4 & 6, namely, Indu Devi, Subhit Mandal and Basuki Mandal along with one Baiju Mandal (non-petitioner).

¶23

5. And in Sessions Trial No. 643 of 1998, which was with respect to petitioner nos.- 2, 3 & 5, namely, Sukumar Mandal, Santosh Mandal and Nand Lal Mandal, but on appearance on 03.02.1999, the petitioners, namely, Santosh Mandal, Subhit Mandal, Nand Lal Mandal, Basuki Mandal and one Baijnath Mandal (non-petitioner) were discharged, but the trial only with respect to petitioner nos.-

¶24

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.392 of 2013 (6) dt.23-08-2013 3/4

¶25

1 & 2, namely, Indu Devi and Sukumar Mandal, commenced who subsequently had also been acquitted on 18.09.2004.

¶26

6. But due to bifurcation of the records at earlier occasion in the supplementary records, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, on submission of final form, warrant of arrest etc. were issued and since the petitioners were not in a position to produce any authentic paper, at the relevant time, so no material was placed in spite of filing of petition with affidavit by the petitioner no. 2, namely, Sukumar Mandal, seeking due orders in the light of facts stated above and the court below rightly called for the original records just to verify and be sure about actual state of affairs.

¶27

7. It is submitted that the original records have already been received, but still the matter against the petitioners in both the supplementary records are unnecessarily kept pending, which under law could not have been, since they i.e. the petitioners have either been acquitted or discharged, as the case may be.

¶28

8. The court below is directed to examine the record thoroughly and immediately pass due orders in

¶29

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.392 of 2013 (6) dt.23-08-2013 4/4

¶30

accordance with law. With the above directions and observations, this writ application stands disposed of.

¶31

9. Let this order be at once communicated to

¶32

the court below through FAX at the cost of the petitioners.

¶33

(Akhilesh Chandra, J)

¶34

Praveen-II/-

Indu Devi and Ors. v. High Court Of Judicature At Patna Through Its Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indu Devi and Ors. v. High Court Of Judicature At Patna Through Its Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Bahadur Yadav and Anr. Vs State of Bihar

Dharmendra Nath Roy Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Suresh Bhagat Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Baiju Mahto Vs State of Bihar

G.d. Memorial Homeopathic Medical College And Hospital Through Its Principal Dr. Bishwa Mitra Ojha Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Jharkhand, Ranchi and Ors.

Ashok Yadav Vs the State of Bihar