Allowed

Umakant Prasad 'nirala' and Anr. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC23 Feb 2016CR. MISC./12072/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of a cognizance order. The court set aside the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali, noting that parties had approached the Civil Court and parallel proceedings were pending for the same cause of action.

What did the court decide?

The petition for quashing of the order of cognizance dated 01.02.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali, in Complaint Case No.247 of 2012 was allowed.

Umakant Prasad 'nirala' and Anr. Vs State Of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.12072 of 2013

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -247 Year- 2012 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- -

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Umakant Prasad 'Nirala', S/O Bishandeo Paswan, Secretary, Scheduled Castes Cooperative Housing Construction Society, Hajipur, District- Vaishali,

¶6

Arjun Bhagat, S/O Dewari Bhagat, both resident of village- Yusufpur, P.S. and Town- Hajipur, District- Vaishali

¶7

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar

¶10

Raj Kishore Manjhi, S/O Bishundeo Manjhi, resident of village- Babhwaiya, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran, presently residing at 4M/87, Bahadurpur Housing Colony, Patna- 800028

¶11

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

¶12

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶13

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shravan Kumar, Sr. Advocate with

¶14

Mr. Dinesh Maharaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : APP

¶15

===========================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-02-2016

¶17

No one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2.

¶18

The Petitioners seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 01.02.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Complaint Case No.247 of 2012/Tr. No.4492 of 2012.

¶19

The case of the Complainant is that he had purchased certain piece of land upon which he built up a boundary wall. However, the Complainant gave huge amount to the Petitioners for purchase of additional land but the same was not delivered and the money was misappropriated.

¶20

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12072 of 2013 dt.23-02-2016

¶21

2/2

¶22

It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that after the matter was reported the police investigated into the allegation and submitted Final Report with a recommendation that the Informant be proceeded against. However, a Protest Petition was filed which was considered as Complaint and hence, the case proceeded. There are series of documents to show that the parties have already approached the Civil Court and hence, it appears that two parallel proceedings are going on for the same cause of action.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid, the order of cognizance dated 01.02.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Complaint Case No.247 of 2012/Tr. No.4492 of 2012 is hereby set aside.

¶24

The application stands allowed .

¶25

(Anjana Prakash, J) JA/-

¶26

U T

Umakant Prasad 'nirala' and Anr. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umakant Prasad 'nirala' 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dasrath Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Pappu Visihwakarma and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Amit Kumar @ Munna Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Manish Mandal @ Nepali Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar @ Bablu Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Bairolia Vs State of Bihar and Anr.