Disposed

Rahul Jha and Anr. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC17 Jan 2014CR. MISC./42836/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, minors, challenged the conversion of Section 144 to 145 Cr.P.C. proceedings. The court found no infirmity but noted the revisional court did not rule on minority. It disposed of the application, granting liberty to the S.D.M. to consider minority contentions in the final order.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to the S.D.M. to consider all contentions of the petitioners regarding minority while passing the final order.

Rahul Jha and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42836 of 2013 (2) dt.17-01-2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42836 of 2013

¶4

====================================================== 1. Rahul Jha Son Of Sri Shiv Kumar Jha Minor Son And Under The Guardianship Of Sri Shiv Kumar Jha, Resident Of Village- Dekuli, P.S.Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga

¶5

1. Kanhaya Jha @ Deepak Kumar Jha Son Of Sri Shiv Kumar Jha Minor Son And Under The Guardianship Of Sri Shiv Kumar Jha, Resident Of Village- Dekuli, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar

¶8

Ful Kumar Jha Son Of Sri Gauri Shankar Jha Resident Of VillageDekuli, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga

¶9

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

02/ 17-01-2014 The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 14.06.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Criminal Revision No. 196 of 2012, whereby order dated 27.09.2011 passed in M.R. Case No. 1414 of 2011 by Subdivisional Officer, Sadar, Darbhanga has been affirmed, whereby 144 Cr.P.C. proceeding has been converted into 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding.

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that both the petitioners are minor.

¶12

The order of the learned S.D.M. by which 144 Cr.P.C. proceeding has been converted into 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding does not reflect that the question of minority was raised by the

¶13

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42836 of 2013 (2) dt.17-01-2014

¶14

petitioners when after filing of the show cause the order was passed by the learned S.D.M.

¶15

This Court does not find any infirmity in the order of the S.D.M. or the revisional order. However, the question of minority was raised before revisional court but the revisional court did not give any finding.

¶16

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with liberty to the S.D.M. to consider all contentions of the petitioners while passing the final order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding.

¶17

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶18

DKS/-

Rahul Jha and Anr. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Jha and Anr. v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxmi Narayan Roy Vs The State Of Bihar

Manish Kumar @ Binod Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Raushan Rajak and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Dina Nath Ram and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Lalan Yadav and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.