Allowed

Ranjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Oct 2022CR. MISC./19945/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashes and stays the Sessions Judge's order fixing a case for judgment held in abeyance due to prosecution witness non-attendance. The court directed the Sessions Judge to examine the Investigating Officer, afford parties an opportunity to hear, and deliver judgment within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

The order of the Sessions Judge is allowed; the fixing of the case for judgment is stayed; and the Judge is directed to examine the I.O. and deliver judgment within 15 days.

Ranjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19945 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2011 Thana- UCHKAGAON District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Ranjeet Kumar Son Of Late Prabhudayal Singh Resident Of Village- Jhirwa, Ward No. 3, Police Station- Uchakagaon, District - Gopalganj.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Arvind Yadav @ Arbind Yadav Son of Punyadev Yadav Resident of village - Shyampur, Police Station- uchakagaon, District - Gopalganj.

¶9

Rajeev Yadav Son of Punyadev Yadav Resident of village - Shyampur, Police Station- uchakagaon, District - Gopalganj.

¶10

Binod Yadav Son of Punyadev Yadav Resident of village - Shyampur, Police Station- uchakagaon, District - Gopalganj.

¶11

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baxi S.R.P. Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. H.A. Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 20-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 11.03.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Sessions Trial No. 765 of 2016, whereby and whereunder application filed by the prosecution under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for examining one Arjun Prasad, I.O. and for taking strong action against him was not decided and the evidence of the prosecution was closed only because no other prosecution witnesses were present only on the request of defence, their evidence was closed and the case was

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19945 of 2022(2) dt.20-10-2022 2/3

¶17

fixed for judgment on 21.10.2020.

¶18

Mr. Baxi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner

¶19

submits that after the examination-in-chief in part, the Additional Sessions Judge-IV could not produce the attendance of said Sri Arjun Prasad for further examination. It is further submitted that the learned Sessions Judge on the application of the defence has closed the evidence on behalf of the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge at his own level tried to secure the attendance of said Sri Arjun Prasad, but he did not appear for further examination. The learned Sessions Judge, though made some attempts but has not exhausted all the methods to secure the attendance of the witness. The non bailable warrant of arrest, the warrant of attachment and approaching S.P. for the purpose was not adopted by the Sessions Judge. The present place of posting and the name of the controlling authority was already on the record. It is lastly submitted that without examining the most material witness, the learned Sessions Judge, Gopalganj on 11.03.2022 was pleased to close the evidence on behalf of the prosecution as no prosecution witness was present on that day. On the same day, he closed the evidence of defence also and fixed the case on 21.10.2022 for hearing and delivering the judgment.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19945 of 2022(2) dt.20-10-2022 3/3

¶21

Having heard learned senior counsel, perusing the case record and in the interest of justice, the order of the learned court below fixing next date of hearing and for the judgment as 21.10.2022 is hereby stayed and the learned court below is directed to call for the I.O., cross examine him and after giving ample opportunity of hearing to all the parties deliver its judgment within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶22

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application is allowed.

¶23

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶24

devendra/-

Ranjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Sagar Yadav @ Sagar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Neelesh Mandal @ Nilesh Kumar @ Nilesh Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Sarkar Vs the State of Bihar

Deepak Pandey Vs the State of Bihar