The Patna High Court quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners under Sections 366A, 368, and 496 IPC, finding no offence made out against them and rejecting the argument that the evidence stage precludes interference.
Impugned order and criminal prosecution against the petitioners quashed; applications allowed.
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.23110 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2278 Year- 2012 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA
======================================================
.... Opposite Parties
====================================================== With
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24177 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2278 Year- 2012 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA
======================================================
Versus
.... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance : (In Cr.Misc. No.23110 of 2015) For the Petitioner : M/S Sandeep Kumar & Ajit Kumar, Advs. For the State : Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP For the complainant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Adv. (In Cr.Misc. No.24177 of 2015)
For the Petitioners : M/S Sandeep Kumar & Ajit Kumar, Advs. For the State : Mr. Murlidhar, APP For the complainant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 16-02-2017
These are applications under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the order, dated 08.04.2015, passed by Ad Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, IV, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 669 of 2014 arising out of Complaint Case No. 2278 (C) of 2012 whereby the prayer of the petitioners to discharge under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been refused.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23110 of 2015 dt.16-02-2017
2
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23110 of 2015 dt.16-02-2017
3
376 of the Indian Penal Code against co-accused, Brajesh Singh.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23110 of 2015 dt.16-02-2017
4
Brajesh Singh also says under Sections 366A, 368 and 496 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, their criminal prosecution is bad ab initio. For substantial justice criminal prosecution of the petitioners can not be allowed only for the reason that the trial is at the stage of prosecution evidence.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
SA/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | |
| UploadingDate | 07.03.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
07.03.2017 |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed given that no offence appears to be made out against them.
Whether the trial stage prevents this Court from interfering in the discharge order.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Ram Binay Singh
Uttam Narain Singh
The State of Bihar
Puja Singh
Birendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
