Dismissed

Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC7 Apr 2016CR. MISC./26048/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Order dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of a rejection of a complaint case under Section 482 CrPC. The Court held that an impugned order rejecting the complaint was correctly passed given the factual scenario involving the informant's liability for false information.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed; the impugned order rejecting the complaint case was affirmed.

Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 26048 of 2013

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -54 Year- 2011 Thana -SHEKHPURA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSEKHPURA

¶3

====================================================== Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar S/O Surendra Singh Resident of Village Andauli, P.S. Chewara, District Sheikhpura.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Vinod Pandey S/O Bimal Pandey Resident of Village Andauli, P.S. Chewara, District Sheikhpura. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

¶5

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Deo Singh Yadav (App)

¶6

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶7

2. 07-04-2016 Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

¶8

The petitioner, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 14-08-2012 passed in Complaint Case No. 54(C) of 2011 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura, whereby the learned Magistrate has rejected the complaint case.

¶9

Fact remains that though the petitioner, who was accused in Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 312 of 2011, was exonerated by the police and while submitting the final report. The police had recommended for prosecution of the informant of the case under

¶10

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26048 of 2013 (2) dt.07-04-2016

¶11

2/2

¶12

Sections 182 & 211 of the Indian Penal Code, however; the informant had filed a protest petition, which was treated as complaint case and in the said complaint, after enquiry, processes were already issued to the accused person i.e. petitioner.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid fact, the Court is of the opinion that learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has rightly rejected the case no. 54(c) of 2011 by the impugned order.

¶14

The petition stands dismissed.

¶15

(Rakesh Kumar, J.)

¶16

Anay

¶17

U T

Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Pramod Saw Mill and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Forest And Environment Department Govt. Of Bihar and Ors.

Suman Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Surya Dayal Rai and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Pravesh Singh and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjay Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Saroj Yadav and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.