Dismissed

Kokari Singh and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC1 Aug 2016CR. MISC./15099/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court refused an adjournment application seeking time to file a supplementary affidavit and record witness evidence. The petition challenging the rejection of the discharge petition was dismissed with a direction to dispose of the underlying case promptly.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for adjournment refused; petition dismissed; direction to trial court to conclude case logically.

Kokari Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15099 of 2014

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -246 Year- 2007 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE DistrictMUZAFFARPUR

¶4

====================================================== 1. Kokai Singh 2. Umesh Singh, Both Sons of Nathuni Singh. 3. Pappu Singh, Son of Kokai Singh . All Residents of Village- Andaul, P.S.:- Baruraj, DistrictMuzaffarpur .... .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Chalitar Ram, son of Jitan Ram, resident of village- Andaul, P.S. Baruraj, District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr.Indiwar Kumari(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶5

3 01-08-2016 On call, a prayer is being made by learned counsel for the petitioners, in presence of Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and Sri Chandra Shekhar Anand, learned counsel for the Opp.Party no.2 for adjourning the case , so that the petitioners may file supplementary affidavit and bring on record evidence of witnesses recorded before charge. The present petition was filed against the order

¶6

dated 03.01.2014, whereby the petition under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge of the petitioners was rejected.

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15099 of 2014 (3) dt.01-08-2016

¶8

2/2

¶9

In this case, a complaint was filed long back in the year 2007 and it is not clear as to why such delay has occurred. In this case complaint was filed in the year 2007 and in the year 2014 the case came to the stage of charge and,thereafter, again when in the year 2016 the present matter was taken up, a prayer was made for adjourning the case for filing supplementary affidavit.

¶10

Accordingly, the prayer for adjournment stands

¶11

refused.

¶12

I have perused the impugned order .I do not find any error in the impugned order. The petition stands dismissed.

¶13

While dismissing the present petition, it is desirable to direct the court below to take immediate steps so that the case

¶14

may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay.

¶15

(Rakesh Kumar, J)

¶16

NKS/U

Kokari Singh and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kokari Singh and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

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

Ram Swarth Choudhary Vs Kunti Devi and Anr.

Shami Ali @ Sami Alli @ Samir Dewan Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Nazir Khan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Gupta and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Tata Teleservices Limited Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Ranjeet Singh and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.