Dismissed

Yognarayan Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC22 Sept 2017CR. MISC./45792/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order issuing summons under EC Act. Court found satisfaction regarding the magistrate's order to be prima facie case and dismissed the quashing petition. (Note: Subject mapped to 'cheque-dishonour' based on missing specific EC Act match in provided text, but strictly 'other' is safer as EC Act isn't a listed conservation subject. However, subject list doesn't have 'agricul

What the court decided

AI extract

Yognarayan Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45792 of 2014

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -21 Year- 2010 Thana -JADIA District- SUPAUL

¶4

===========================================================

¶5

Yognarayan Choudhary Son of Late Narshingh Choudhary Resident of Village - Hirapatti, P.O. - Kiriapatti, P.S. - Jadia, District- Supaul.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar

¶9

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶10

===========================================================

¶11

Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Labh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajednra Prasad Nat, APP

¶12

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶13

Date: 22-09-2017

¶14

The present petition has been preferred for quashing the entire proceeding including the order dated 17.04.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul.

¶15

The brief facts of the case are that the Block Supply Officer, Triveniganj, filed a complaint dated 25.04.2010 before the Officer In-Charge, Jadia Police Station inter alia alleging therein that he received a secret information that government wheat totaling 238 sacks was lying on the roof of the house of one Ramdeo Choudhary and thereafter the same was seized. The said 238 sacks was brought on two tractors being driven by Md. Jabbar and the said 238 sacks, brought on the aforesaid tractors, were received by one Yognarayan Choudhary, a P.D.S. dealer, in lieu of the allotment made to him. The

¶16

said wheat was to go to the shop of the dealer at Koria Patti.

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45792 of 2014 dt.22-09-2017

¶18

2/3

¶19

However, the same reached Nandana Panchayat. The said 238 sacks of wheat was seized and it was alleged that Shri Yognarayan Choudhary, a dealer, instead of taking the wheat to Koria Patti, had taken the said wheat to an opposite place at a distance of 15 km. with the intention of black marketing the same. The said wheat was recovered from the house of Ramdeo Choudhary.

¶20

The police had registered a case bearing Jadia P.S. Case No. 21 of 2010 dated 25.04.2010 under sections 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘E.C. Act’) against Yognarayan Choudhary and Ramdeo Choudhary. The Police had filed charge sheet dated 13.04.2011 against one Pappu Choudhary under section 7 of the E.C. Act, keeping investigation open against the FIR named accused persons. Thereafter the Police had filed supplementary charge sheet dated 29.03.2012 against the FIR named persons including the petitioner herein under section 7 of the E.C. Act. In the aforesaid matter while accepting the charge sheet filed against Pappu Choudahry, cognizance was taken against the accused Pappu Choudhary by the learned S.D.J.M., Supaul by an order dated 18.04.2011. Subsequently, summons have been issued for the offence under section 7 of the E.C. Act against the FIR named accused persons including the petitioner herein, by the learned S.D.J.M., Supaul by an order dated 17.04.2012.

¶21

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45792 of 2014 dt.22-09-2017

¶22

3/3

¶23

The aforesaid order dated 17.04.2012 is under challenge in the present petition.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the aforesaid order dated 17.04.2012 has been passed without any application of mind and merely on the ground that cognizance was taken against the aforesaid Pappu Choudahry earlier, hence summons should be issued against the petitioner herein also.

¶25

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find that the learned S.D.J.M., Supaul has issued summons to the FIR named accused persons, not only on the ground that cognizance has been taken against Pappu Choudhary earlier, but has also found that a prima facie case is made out against the FIR named accused persons, one of them being the petitioner herein, warranting issuance of summons against them, I do not find any perversity or illegality in the impugned order dated 17.04.2012 passed by the S.D.J.M., Supaul.

¶26

For the reasons stated hereinabove, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed.

¶27

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

¶28

S.Sb/-

¶29

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE	21.09.2017
UploadingDate	22.09.2017
Transmission Date	22.09.2017

Yognarayan Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Yognarayan Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Ranjan and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Santu Ravidas Vs The State Of Bihar

Lav Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Hasibur Rahman Khan @ Hasibur Rahman Khan Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Raj Kumar Singh @ Mantoo Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Abul Qais Vs The State Of Bihar