The Patna High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC where the trial court had already framed charges and further delay occurred. The applications were dismissed to expedite the trial.
Both criminal miscellaneous applications filed under Section 482 CrPC are dismissed.
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 30565 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -53 Year- 2012 Thana -CHATOUNI District-
EASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI)
===========================================================
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s
WITH
Criminal Miscellaneous No 33671 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -53 Year- 2012 Thana -CHATOUNI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI)
=========================================================== 1. Pawan Punit Chaudhary @ Jeetu Son of Surendra Kumar Chaudhary Residentof Mohalla Chhatauni, Near Mahavir Petrol Pump, P.S. - Chhatauni, District- East Champaran (Motihari).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s
=========================================================== For the Petitioner/s : M/s Sandeep Kr & Rana Vikram Singh, Advocates For the S t a t e : Mr Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 02-08-2017
State.
Heard counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30565 of 2014 dt.02-08-2017
2/2
2 Earlier when the matter was taken up, time was granted to the petitioners to ascertain the current stage of the proceedings before the trial Court. Today, counsel for the petitioners has informed that the trial has proceeded and charges have already been framed and now the matter is likely to proceed for evidence. He further submits that although the charges have been framed six months back but there has been no progress in the trial during this period.
3 In view of the development subsequent to filing of the instant quashing petitions, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief in the applications filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code against the order taking cognizance and proceeding arising therefrom.
4 In view of the aforesaid, both these applications are
dismissed.
5 However, it is needless to say that the trial Court will make endeavours to expedite the trial without being prejudiced by rejection of the quashing applications by this Court.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
M.E.H. /-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAVDATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 04.08.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
04.08.2017 |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant relief under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings which have already progressed to the framing of charges stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Surendra Kumar Chaudhary and others
Pawan Punit Chaudhary
The State of Bihar
Ruchi Chaudhary
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
