Disposed

Ranjit Lal Bhaiya v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC29 Apr 2014CR. MISC./44399/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court heard a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a rejection of a discharge petition. Finding that the charge had already been framed and trial commenced, the court declined to interfere, disposed of the petition without positive orders, but directed the lower court to dispose of the trial expeditively to avoid delay.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without passing any positive order; liberty granted to raise points during trial; lower court directed to proceed expeditiously.

Ranjit Lal Bhaiya Vs the State of Bihar and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.44399 of 2011 ====================================================== Ranjit Lal Bhaiya , son of Kishan Lal Bhaiya, Resident of Mohalla - Kassilly, Police Station – Civil Lines, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Babu Lal Dhokari, son of Gopal Lal Dhikari, resident of Mohalla - Krishna Dwarika, Police Station - Civil Lines, District - Gaya .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5 29-04-2014 Heard Sri Bakshi S.R.P. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ajay Kumar Jha, learned A.P.P. as well as Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of informant / opposite party no. 2.

¶2

The petitioner, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 14.12.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge - cum - F.T.C. Ist, Gaya, in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 2011/ 256 of 2011 (arising out of Gaya Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 284 of 2005). By the said order learned Sessions Judge has rejected the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for his discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C.

¶3

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier F.I.R. was lodged for offences which were not triable by the court

¶4

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44399 of 2011 (5) dt.29-04-2014

¶5

2/3

¶6

of Sessions and after investigation Police submitted charge sheet for the same offences. However, after submission of charge sheet the learned Magistrate differing with the police report has passed order of cognizance under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, petitioner approached this court by filing a quashing application vide Cr. Misc. No. 9109 of 2007, which was dismissed on 3^rd March, 2009, granting liberty to the petitioner to raise the point at the time of charge. When the case was committed to the court of Sessions, before charge, a petition was filed for discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C., which has been rejected.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant / opposite party no. 2, informs the Court that discharge petition was rejected on 14.12.2011. Subsequently, charge has already been framed. Meaning thereby, that trial has already commenced.

¶8

Keeping in view the fact that charge has already been framed, the court is of the opinion that it would not be advisable for this court to interfere with the same, and as such, without passing any positive order, the petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that petitioner would be at liberty to raise all the points which have been raised in the present petition during the trial

¶9

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44399 of 2011 (5) dt.29-04-2014

¶10

3/3

¶11

before the court below.

¶12

Keeping in view the fact that occurrence in the case had taken place in the year 2005, while disposing of the present petition, it is desirable to direct the court below to proceed with the case expeditiously, so that, trial may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay.

¶13

(Rakesh Kumar, J)

¶14

Praful/-

Ranjit Lal Bhaiya v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Lal Bhaiya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajeev Kumar @ Ful Kumar and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Amar Kumar @ Manish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Lalita Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Shiv Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Most. Jaigun and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.