Umesh Prasad Rai Pankaj and Ors. v. Union Of India Through The General Manager, E.c. Railway, Hajipur

Patna HC1 Sept 2016CR. MISC./27404/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justices Aditya Kumar Trivedi rejected a criminal miscellaneous petition as infructuous. The court observed that since the lower court did not discharge petitioners despite admitted lack of Section 3 R.P. (U.P.) Act offence, the petition challenging that order was no longer viable.

What did the court decide?

None; petition rejected as infructuous.

Umesh Prasad Rai Pankaj and Ors. Vs Union Of India Through The General Manager, E.c. Railway, Hajipur — Patna HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27404 of 2014 (02) dt.01-09-2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27404 of 2014

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -11 Year- 2001 Thana -BEGUSARAI GRP CASE DistrictBEGUSARAI

¶4

====================================================== 1. Umesh Prasad Rai Pankaj, son of Sri Ram Ashish Rai Resident of Village - Chandchour P.S. - Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur, presently posted as Senior Section Engineering, Pathway, Muzaffarpur 2. Manish Kumar, son of Sri Birendra Kumar Singh Resident of Brahampura Town, P.S. and District - Muzaffarpur, presently posted as Senior Section Engineering, Pathway, Sonepur 3. Bipin Kunar Singh Son of Late Vishnu Bahadur, Resident of Lohianagar, P.O. - Suhadnagar, Dist- Begusarai, presently posted in the office of Senior Section Engineering, Pathway, Thana Bihpur 4. Nand Kishore Chaudhary Son of Late Nathu Chaudhary Resident of Bahadurpur, Ward No. 27, Town/P.S./Dist. - Samastipur, presently posted under Assistant Divisional Engineer (Path), Barauni

¶5

Shiv Shankar Jha Son of Late Chandrashekhar Jha Resident of Kathalbari Vidhyapatti Chowk, Town/P.S. /Dist.- Darbhanga, presently posted as Stock Verifier, Sonepur

¶6

Santosh Kumar Verma Son of Late Madan Prasad Srivastav Resident of Balughat, P.S. Sadar Muzaffarpur, Dist. - Muzaffarpur, presently posted as Junior Engineering, Path, Bachwara

¶7

Umeshwar Paswan Son of Bilat Paswan Resident of Rajapur, P.S. - Bachwara, District - Begusarai, presently posted as Khalasi in the office of Sr. Section Engineering, Path East, Samastipur

¶8

U.P. Verma Son of Late Bhola Prasad Verma Resident of Maheshpur, P.S. - Bhagwanpur, Dist. - Begusarai, presently posted as Store Verifier, Garhara Depot

¶9

Ajay Kumar Brahmchari Son of Sri Ram Lakhan Sharma Resident of Arpa, P.S. - Hilsa, District - Nalanda, presently posted as S.I. of RPF at Hazipur, Headquarter, All 1 to 9 working under E.C. Railway, Hajipur 10. Pradip Kumar Son of Late Bhawani Shankar C/o M/s Shanti Trading Company, Purani Bazar, Durga Asthan, Muzaffarpur

¶10

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶11

Union of India through the General Manager, E.C. Railway, Hajipur

¶12

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhay Shankar Singh -Advocate For the Railway : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad-Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶13

02 01-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel representing the Railway.

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27404 of 2014 (02) dt.01-09-2016

¶15

Though, under the present petition, the order dated 04.01.2014 passed by the Railway Judicial Magistrate, Barauni Junction, Begusarai relating to Barauni R.P.F. Case No.11 of 2001 has been brought up under challenge. Furthermore during course of submission, respective learned counsels have fairly admitted that while perceiving that no offence under Section 3 of R.P. (U.P.) Act is made out, the learned lower Court did not agree to discharge the petitioners, was not at all relevant in the background of the fact that offence of I.P.C. on account of some sort of illegal activities during maintaining of stock register as well as other concerning records were traced out and so, discharge was really not permissible. However, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that charge has not been framed under relevant provisions of I.P.C. rather under Section 3 of R.P. (U.P.) Act.

¶16

That being so, instant petition has become infructuous and is accordingly, rejected.

¶17

However, petitioners will be at liberty to challenge the relevant order in the background of finding so recorded by the learned lower Court under order impugned.

¶18

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)

¶19

Vikash/-

¶20

U T

Umesh Prasad Rai Pankaj and Ors. v. Union Of India Through The General Manager, E.c. Railway, Hajipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Prasad Rai Pankaj and Ors. v. Union Of India Through The General Manager, E.c. Railway, Hajipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Kumar Sah Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Kanhaiya Bind @ Kanhaiya Chaudhary @ Kanhiaya Bind @ Kanhay Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Uttam Kumar and Ors. Vs Abhimanyu Singh

Dheeraj Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Punit Sahni and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Satish Chandra Vs The State Of Bihar