The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an order of cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur, in a case involving the alleged kidnapping of a minor. The court set aside the proceedings.
Proceedings including order of cognizance dated 28.9.2010 set aside.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.39587 of 2010
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -0 Year- null Thana -null District- SAMASTIPUR
=========================================================== 1. Md. Sayed son of Abdul Majeed 2. Md. Khursheed 3. Md. Parvez 4. Md. Javed, petitioner nos. (2), (3) and (4) are sons of Md. Sayeed, all are resident of village Mohammadpur Koari, P.S. Waini, Distt. Samastipur
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.N. Pd. Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. J.N. Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 22-02-2016
No one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No.2.
The Petitioners seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 28.9.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in C.R. No.1443 of 2009 arising out of Tajpur P.S. case No.40 of 2007.
The case of the Complainant is that the Petitioner No.2 had taken away his son Md. Sajid of about 11 years to Nagpur but he never returned and hence the present Complaint.
It has been submitted that on this Complaint a First Information Report was instituted. Thereafter the boy was recovered
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39587 of 2010 dt.22-02-2016
2/2
from the workshop of another person and statement was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. According to the said statement annexed as Annexure-2, no offence of kidnapping is made out. It was under these circumstances that the police submitted final report with the recommendation to prosecute the Informant under Sections 182, 211 I.P.C. It is to thwart such prosecution that the protest petition was filed, upon which cognizance was taken.
Having gone through the background facts and the statement of the alleged victim, the application is allowed and the proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 28.9.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in C.R. No.1443 of 2009 arising out of Tajpur P.S. case No.40 of 2007 is hereby set aside.
(Anjana Prakash, J)
Narendra/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings instituted under C.R. No.1443 of 2009 arising out of P.S. Case No.40 of 2007 should be quashed.
Whether the complaint alleging kidnapping of the complainant's son was based on a motive to thwart prosecution under Sections 182, 211 IPC.
Md. Sayed, Md. Khursheed, Md. Parvez, Md. Javed
The State of Bihar, Abdul Samid
Anjana Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
