The High Court refused to quash a Magistrate's order taking cognizance of an offence involving dangerous driving and assault. The Court held that no illegality was committed and the defense of a false case cannot be examined at the cognizance stage.
The application seeking quashing of the Magistrate's order was 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.42556 of 2013
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -419 Year- 2012 Thana -MADHEPURA District- MADHEPURA
=========================================================== Aditya Prakash S/O Ashok Prasad Yadav R/O Ward No. 9, Azad Nagar, P.S+ District- Madhepura.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Dhar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Mayanand Jha, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 08-04-2017
By way of the present application preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 22.06.2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura in Madhepura P. S. Case No. 419 of 2012 by which he has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 353 and 337/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’),
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42556 of 2013 dt.08-04-2017
2/2
offences alleged were found true and the petitioner was sent up for trial.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)
Kanchan/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 10.04.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
10.04.2017 |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash the Magistrate's order taking cognizance of offences under Sections 279, 353, and 337/34 IPC.
Whether a false case allegation by the petitioner suffices to quash the proceeding at the stage of taking cognizance.
Whether the learned Magistrate committed any illegality in finding a prima facie case based on the FIR and police report.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Aditya Prakash
The State of Bihar
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
