The High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order taking cognizance of an offence, finding no merit in the petition.
Application for quashing cognizance order dismissed. Defence of prior complaint to be raised before lower court.
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.30137 of 2014
Arising Out of P.S.Case No. -17 Year- 2013 Thana -DARBHANGA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictDARBHANGA
======================================================
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
.... .... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Humayu Ahmad Khan, APP
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER
2 . This is an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying therein to quash the order dated 01.05.2013 passed by Sri Deshmukh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Biroul at Benipur (Darbhanga) whereunder cognizance under Sections 147, 323, 341, 379 and 384 of the IPC was taken against the petitioners.
3 . It is alleged that on the date of occurrence, all the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30137 of 2014 (2) dt.05-07-2017
2/2
petitioners surrounded the complainant and assaulted him by fists and slaps. They went at the Darwaja of the complainant and abused him and forcibly took his signature on Stamp Paper and snatched cash amount of Rs.500/- and a bicycle.
4. The complainant on solemn affirmation and his enquiry witnesses at the time of enquiry supported the allegation made in the complaint petition. The court below finding primafacie case true, took cognizance of offence as stated above.
5 . The defence of the petitioners that prior to the case of the complainant, they had filed complaint case against them will be taken into consideration at later stage. They will have opportunity to put their defence at the appropriate stage before the court below. The order has been passed on the basis of material on record.
6. In view of discussions made above, I do not find any merit in this application. This application is accordingly dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar, J)
B.Kr./-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash the order taking cognizance of the offence.
Whether the defence of prior complaint filed by petitioners merits consideration at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rameshwar Pandey and others
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
