Dismissed

Ram Sagar Rai and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC1 Dec 2022CR. MISC./32576/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Miscellaneous No.32576 of 2016, the Patna High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an order rejecting a petition for recall of prosecution witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C., holding the lower court was correct not to interfere.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned order was dismissed.

Ram Sagar Rai and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32576 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2009 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Ram Sagar Rai and Ors Son of Singeshwar Rai. null

¶5

Ramesh Rai, Son of Singeshwar Rai. null

¶6

Bira Rai, Son of Singeshwar Rai. All are Resident of Village- Semra Nizamat, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioners.

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

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

¶12

WITH

¶13

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32580 of 2016

¶14

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2009 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur

¶15

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

¶16

SINGESHWAR RAI @ SINGESAR RAI Son of Late Laldhari Rai.

¶17

Satish Rai, Son of Lakhindra Rai Both are Resident of Village- Semra Nizamat, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioners.

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶22

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32576 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32580 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶23

4 01-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶24

APP for the State.

¶25

The present application under Section 482 of the Code

¶26

of Criminal Procedure has been preferred on behalf of the

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32576 of 2016(4) dt.01-12-2022 2/3

¶28

petitioners for quashing the order dated 10.08.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial No.20 of 2010, arising out of Sahebganj P.S. Case No.53 of 2009, by which the petition filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the recall of some prosecution witness for their cross-examination has been rejected.

¶29

The prosecution case, in brief, is that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, after forming unlawful assembly, are said to have injured the father and son of the informant.

¶30

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioners are own pattidar of the informant and the deceased. The alleged occurrence took place due to land dispute and enmity of pattidari . It is further submitted that during course of trial due to lack of proper instructions some of the P.Ws., namely, P.Ws.1, 2, 5 and 6 could not be cross-examined on some vital points regarding the case and their re-cross-examination is essential so that the real facts of the alleged occurrence may come out. For this purpose, the petitioners filed a petition under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned Court below for recalling of some of the

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32576 of 2016(4) dt.01-12-2022 3/3

¶32

witnesses. The prosecution filed rejoinder. The learned Court below, after hearing the parties, rejected the petition filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. mechanically and technically without considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the correct perspective. Hence, this application.

¶33

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records available on record, I am not inclined to interfere with the order dated 10.08.2015 and the learned Judge has rightly rejected the petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners.

¶34

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

¶35

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶36

Trivedi/-

Ram Sagar Rai and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sagar Rai and Ors. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Mobin @ Md. Movin Vs the State of Bihar

Ramesh Yadav @ Ramesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shakil Ahmad Vs the State of Bihar

Satrughan Jha and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Mahendra Das and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sheojee Bhagat and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar