Single judge dismissed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking modification of an order that had refused to quash criminal proceedings, finding no reason to alter the previous decision.
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.26220 of 2017
======================================================
Naushad Ali, Son of Md. Yunus, Resident of Mohalla-Medhu Khan Ka Hat, P.S.-Dumraon, District-Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahtab Alam, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Anita Kumari Singh
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER
3 24-07-2017
This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to modify the order dated 18.07.2013 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34293 of 2009, whereunder the prayer of the petitioner for quashing the entire proceeding, including the cognizance order dated 29.05.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in Tr. No. 1665 of 2009 (G.R. No. 1285 of 2008), was refused.
On going through the order dated 18.07.2013 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 34293 of 2009, I do not find any reason to modify the said order. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application under Section 482 CrPC for modification of the order refusing to quash proceedings should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Naushad Ali
The State of Bihar
Rajendra Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
