The High Court rejected the petitioner's request to quash the order refusing discharge. The court held that definite allegations exist in the FIR and discharge would defeat justice. It directed the trial to proceed without adjournments.
Application for quashing of acquittal/discharge order dismissed; trial directed to proceed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.1613 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -39 Year- 2006 Thana -KAUAKOL District- NAWADA ====================================================== 1. Nivedita Singh W/o Sri Shrawan Kumar Singh, Resident of VillageRukhi, P.S.- Roh in the District of Nawada .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate Mrs. Anita Kumari Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. C. Jawahar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 5 01-08-2014 The Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 9.12.2013 passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge II, Nawada in Sessions Trial No.364 of 2010 arising out of Kauakol P.S. case No.39 of 2006, by which he has refused to discharge the present Petitioner.
It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that the witnesses, who had supported the allegations made in the First Information Report, were summoned by a Senior Police Officer, who back tracked at that stage and, therefore, the prosecution deserves to be set aside.
Having gone through the First Information Report, I find that there is definite allegation against the Petitioner made therein and, therefore, the discharge of the Petitioner would be
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1613 of 2014 (5) dt.01-08-2014
2/2
completely against the interest of justice.
In view of such, the present application is dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial without giving unnecessary adjournments to any party. He shall send a list of the witnesses fixing specific dates for each witness for their examination along with a copy of this order to the S.P., Nawada, who is directed to ensure the attendance of the witnesses on the date fixed by the Trial Court so that there is no further delay in the trial.
(Anjana Prakash, J)
Narendra/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court should have discharged the petitioner given the Prosecution witnesses' reluctance to testify.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nivedita Singh
The State Of Bihar
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
