Patna High Court rejected a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash a lower court order rejecting a plea under Section 239 Cr.P.C. based on sufficiency of material for framing charges.
Petition under Section 239 Cr.P.C. rejected.
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.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28770 of 2014 (02) dt.01-09-2016
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.28770 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -332 Year- 2011 Thana -PIRBAHOR District- PATNA ====================================================== 1. Dheeraj Kumar S/o Sri Ashok Kumar. 2. Ashok Kumar S/o Late Laxmi Narain Prasad Both are resident of Lohanipur (Upadhyay Lane), P.S. + P.O. - Kadamkuan, Dist. - Patna. 3. Bimal Kumar S/o Sri Surendra Ram resident of Chitrakut Nagar, Road No. 3A, P.S. Danapur, Dist. - Patna. 4. Jitendra Kumar S/o Ram Chandra Prasad resident of Gagghaghat, Baksaria Tola, P.S. - Sultanganj, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Apurva Kumar -Advocate For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar-(A.P.P.) For the Opposite Party : Mr. Rajendra Prasad-Advocate. Mr. Makardhwaj Upadhyay-Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 02 01-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor along with learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of petitioners in order to expose the inter se strained relationship as a result of which, parties are litigating against each other. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that instant prosecution happens to be malicious one in the background of:- (a) Prosecution has been launched
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28770 of 2014 (02) dt.01-09-2016
2
after four days without any explanation.
(b) Occurrence is alleged to have committed within premises of Civil Court, but neither the concern P.O. nor the Civil Court Administration took notice thereof, nor the Administration was informed at the end of the Civil Court Administration.
(c) Son in-law of accused Ashok Kumar, Samdhi of informant were not at all expected to be dragged in this proceeding who have been purposely, intentionally, malafidely been arrayed as an accused..
(d) The nature of allegation so attributed appears to be improbable.
(e) Witnesses are own henchmen of
complainant.
and on account thereof, rejection of prayer made by
the petitioners under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. by the learned lower Court vide order impugned dated 29.01.2014 in connection with G.R. No.5646 of 2011 before Smt. Kumari Khayati Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna happens to be wrong, illegal. Hence, is fit to be set aside.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28770 of 2014 (02) dt.01-09-2016
3
petitioners at the present moment are matter of trial. For the present, the Court has only to see whether there happens to be sufficient material to justify framing of the charge.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)
Vikash/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order rejecting the petition under Section 239 Cr.P.C. attracting interference.
Whether sufficient material exists to justify framing charges against the petitioners.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dheeraj Kumar
Ashok Kumar
Bimal Kumar
Jitendra Kumar
The State of Bihar
Aditya Kumar Trivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
