Dismissed

Surendra Singh @ Surendra Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Feb 2019CR. MISC./1888/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Patna High Court dismissed the petitioner's criminal miscellaneous petition. The court followed the Supreme Court's decision in Prabhu Dutt Tiwari, holding that the Magistrate had sufficient grounds to summon the petitioner and the High Court's earlier interference was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Instant petition for quashing the summoning order is rejected.

Surendra Singh @ Surendra Kumar Singh Vs The State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.1888 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-673 Year-2017 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Surendra Singh @ Surendra Kumar Singh Late Nanhak Singh Rseident of Village- Gaura Patralay, Paharpura, P.S.- Madanpur, Destrict- Aurngabad (BIHAR)

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Nageshwar Yadav Late Suryadeo Yadav Rseident of Village- Gaura Patralay, Paharpura, P.S.- Madanpur, Destrict- Aurngabad (BIHAR)

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Leelawati Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 01-02-2019

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶12

learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶13

Gone through the order impugned.

¶14

In Prabhu Dutt Tiwari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

¶15

and others reported in (2018) 13 SCC 609 , wherein it has been

¶16

held:-

¶17

“3. At the stage of summoning the accused on the basis of a private complaint, all that is required is a satisfaction by the Magistrate that there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused in the light of the records made available and the evidence adduced by the complainant.

¶18

4. Having gone through the order passed by the

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1888 of 2019(3) dt.01-02-2019

¶20

2/2

¶21

Magistrate, it is fairly clear that there has been the required satisfaction. The discussion by the High Court would give an indication that the Magistrate had to appreciate the evidence and then enter a finding as to whether the accused are guilty or not. At the stage of summoning, as already stated above, the satisfaction required for the Magistrate is only to see whether there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused.

¶22

5. Such a satisfaction for summoning an accused having been made out, the High Court went wrong in interfering with the summoning order. It was too early for the High Court to enter a finding otherwise. The impugned order is, hence, set aside. The appeal is allowed.”

¶23

The order impugned satisfied the ingredients justifying summoning of the petitioner and that being so, instant petition is rejected.

¶24

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)

¶25

vikash/-

¶26

U T

Surendra Singh @ Surendra Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Singh @ Surendra Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhirendra Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Balmukund Rai Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Lal Babu Rai Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Md. Jubaidar @ Md.Jubair @ Jubair @ Jubaiyar and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Rajeshwar Prasad Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Ramji Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.