In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court held that the complaint case appeared to be filed maliciously. The court allowed the application and set aside the order of cognizance and the proceeding.
Application allowed; order of cognizance dated 11.9.2012 and the proceeding in Complaint case No.1270 of 2012 set aside.
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.9861 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1270 Year- 2012 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR
====================================================== 1. Kamal Kishore Singh Son of Sh. Ram Chandra Prasad Singh 2. Indu Devi Wife Of Shri Kamal Kishore Singh
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Shri Akhileshwar Prasad Singh S/O Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, Resident Of Village- Bishunpur Sariya, P.S. Devaria, District- Muzaffarpur. At Present Residing At Chhata Chauk, Balai Campus, P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur
.... .... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate For the State : Mr. B.N.Pandey, APP For Opposite Party No.2 : Ms. Kumari Seema, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER
3 07-11-2014 The Petitioners seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 11.9.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in Complaint case No.1270 of 2012 (Trial No.1071 of 2013).
The case of the Complainant is that on the date of occurrence the accused persons came upon his land and started to claim the same. The Complainant alleged that he had purchased the land from Chandeshwar Prasad Singh, a witness to the Complaint, and when he was summoned he stated that it appears that on account of some fraud the Complainant’s land had also been got executed by the accused persons.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9861 of 2014 (3) dt.07-11-2014
2/2
It has been submitted that the admitted position is that the Petitioners were purchasers from Chandeshwar Prasad Singh, who had executed the sale deed, but instead of arraying him accused Chandeshwar Prasad Singh is a witness to the Complaint. When Chandeshwar Prasad Singh accepted the fact of execution of the sale deed, obviously, the contents of the same were also accepted by him and hence no criminal offence is made out. He also did not raise any objection earlier.
On the other hand, the Counsel for the Complainant submits that Chandeshwar Prasad Singh was also duped by the Complainant and therefore the Petitioners should be put on trial.
Having gone through the facts of the case and the Solemn Affirmation, I would be inclined to hold that in the background facts the Complaint appears to have been filed maliciously. Hence, the application is allowed and the proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 11.9.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in Complaint case No.1270 of 2012 (Trial No.1071 of 2013) is hereby set aside.
However, the quashment of the present proceeding shall have no bearing on any other litigation.
(Anjana Prakash, J)
Narendra/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceeding initiated in the complaint case over land dispute appears to be malicious.
Whether the sale deed execution by Chandeshwar Prasad Singh exonerates the petitioners from criminal liability when he is not accused.
Kamal Kishore Singh
Indu Devi
Pratima Devi
Vimal Kishore Singh
Arjun Singh
The State Of Bihar
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
