The petitioner sought to quash an order framing charges under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC, arguing that concurrent civil proceedings barred the criminal action. The court dismissed the petition as devoid of merit, holding that a party retains the right to invoke all civil and criminal remedies available under law.
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.34668 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2018 Thana- PIPRA District- Patna
======================================================
Malteshwar Singh @ Mallu Singh (Male), aged about 61 years, Son of Late Banshi Singh Resident of Village- Abdalpur, Pipra, P.S.- Pipra, DistrictPatna.
... ... Petitioner
... ... Opposite Parties
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Munna Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon to do so by the office.
This application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed for quashing the order dated 04.12.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Masaurhi, Patna in Pipra P. S. Case No. 101 of 2018, G.R .No. 1447 of 2018 by which learned Magistrate has framed charge against the petitioner under Section(s) 406, 420 and 506 of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34668 of 2021(2) dt.28-04-2022 2/2
Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that the informant has also resorted to civil proceedings for recovery of the money. Making such submission, it is stated that the informant should not have resorted to both civil as well as criminal proceedings in respect of the same transaction/allegation. Such submission is bereft of any legal substance. It is well- settled that a party is entitled to invoke all remedies available to him in accordance with law, both civil as well as criminal.
The petition is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
shyambihari/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a party invoking criminal proceedings initiated prosecution is barred from simultaneously pursuing civil remedies for the same transaction.
Whether the order framing charges under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC in PS. Case No. 101 of 2018 should be quashed.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Malteshwar Singh @ Mallu Singh
The State of Bihar
Sanjay Prasad
MADHURESH PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
