The Patna High Court allowed a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings, including the order of cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, citing wrong advice and absence of the complainant.
The application is allowed and the entire Proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 22.8.2013 is quashed.
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.8554 of 2014
Arising Out of Complaint Case No. -574 Year- 2013 District- MADHEPURA ====================================================== Wakil Yadav @ Wakil Pd. Yadav S/O Late Banarsi Pd. Yadav Resident Of Village- Rasonak, P.S.- Morkahi, District- Khagaria .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Manju Devi, wife of Ram Prawesh Paswan, village Awrohi, P.S. Gamahariya, Distt. Madhepura. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Rai, Adv. For the State : Mr. C. Jawahar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 3 03-11-2014 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the State. The Petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 22.8.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, in connection with Trial No. 4029 of 2013, Complaint Case No. 574 of 2013.
The case of the Complainant is that on 25.5.2013 she met the Petitioner who was the Officer-in-Charge of Gamhariya Police Station and asked him as to why he had not instituted a case on her Complaint and when she demanded original application, she was threatened and pushed on account of which she sustained injury.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8554 of 2014 (3) dt.03-11-2014
2/2
It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that the fact of the matter is that the Complainant had instituted Gamhariya P.S. Case No. 103 of 2012 which was investigated by another Police Officer in which charge sheet has also submitted by him and the Petitioner was no concern with the said Complaint. It appears that it is on wrong advice that the present Complaint has been filed.
Notices had been issued to the Opposite Party No. 2 but despite service of notice, none appears on her behalf.
Considering the aforesaid facts, the application is allowed and the entire Proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 22.8.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, in connection with Trial No. 4029 of 2013, Complaint Case No. 574 of 2013.
(Anjana Prakash, J)
S.Ali/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner should be quashed.
Wakil Yadav @ Wakil Pd. Yadav
The State Of Bihar
Manju Devi
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
