Allowed

Bir Bahadur Mahto @ Bhikhari Mahto and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC13 Nov 2014CR. MISC./8054/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Applicant sought quashing of proceedings initiated in a Complaint Case alleging assault. The Court examined the lack of substantive evidence and the oral nature of the charges. The application was allowed, and the order of cognizance was set aside.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 18.1.2014 in Connection with Complaint Case No. C-762 of 2013 is set aside.

Bir Bahadur Mahto @ Bhikhari Mahto and Ors. Vs State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.8054 of 2014

¶2

Arising Out of Complaiant Case No.C-762, Year- 2013, District- SARAN

¶3

====================================================== 1. Bir Bahadur Mahto @ Bhikhari Mahto, son of late Saryug Mahto 2. Krishna Mahto, son of late Saryug Mahto 3. Chandan Mahto @ Chandan Kumar, son of Krishna Mahto 4. Ravi Mahto @ Ravi Kumar, son of Krishna Mahto 5. Surendra Rai, son of late Ram Chandra Rai 6. Jitendra Prasad @ Jitendra Kumar, son of Baidyanath Prasad 7. Gayatri Devi, wife of Sri Bir Bahadur Mahto All resident of Mohalla - Gudri Rai Ka Chowk, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District - Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar 2. Dharmendra Kumar, son of Bhanu Mahto All resident of Mohalla - Gudri Rai Ka Chowk, P.S.- Bhagwan Bazar, District - Saran

¶6

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

¶7

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Bhushan Prasad Sinha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Gajendera Pd. Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 13-11-2014 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

¶9

The Petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 18.1.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Saran, in connection with Complaint Case No. C-762 of 2013.

¶10

The case of the Complainant is that on the date of occurrence, one of the accused came to his chicken shop, demanded 5 Kg. of chicken but he did not pay for the same. When

¶11

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8054 of 2014 (3) dt.13-11-2014

¶12

2/2

¶13

he demanded the payment, he was assaulted.

¶14

It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that the background fact is that the Petitioners had filed Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 51 of 2013 against the Complainant and his family members in which charge sheet was submitted on 30.4.2013. Subsequently, the present Complaint was instituted with only oral charges which have no substantive ground of proof.

¶15

Notices had been issued to the Opposite Party No. 2 but none appears on his behalf.

¶16

Considering the facts of the case of the Complaint, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 18.1.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Saran, in connection with Complaint Case No. C-762 of 2013 is, hereby, set aside.

¶17

(Anjana Prakash, J)

¶18

S.Ali/-

¶19

U T

Bir Bahadur Mahto @ Bhikhari Mahto and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bir Bahadur Mahto @ Bhikhari Mahto and Ors. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Pandit Vs The State Of Bihar

Kunal Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Guddu Jha Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajeev Kumar and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sri Umashankar Prasad Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Mithilesh Kumari @ Mithilesh Devi @ Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.