Quashed

Bablu @ Bablu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Jul 2023CR. MISC./17631/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous application filed to quash a cognizance order passed by a Magistrate, the court found the order invalid due to lack of application of mind against exonerated accused. Quashing the order under Section 482 CrPC citing Pepsi Foods case

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 10.01.2020 dated 10.01.2020 in Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 461 of 2019 is quashed. Proceedings against other accused shall continue.

Bablu @ Bablu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17631 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-461 Year-2019 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

BABLU @ BABLU KUMAR S/o Sharda Prasad Resident of West Lohanipur, Near Goriyaasthan, P.S.- Kadamkaun, Distt- Patna.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶8

Pawan Kumar Singh S/o Raj Kumar Singh Resident of Laljee Tola, Besides Koyla Toll, P.S.- Ghandhi Maidan, Distt- Patna.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeet Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 11-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

This application has been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 10.01.2020, passed by learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Patna in Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 461 of 2019 by which learned Magistrate has taken cognizance under Sections 323/341/504 and 506/34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The prosecution story in short is that the informant has solemnized his marriage on 28.11.2012 with Rubi Kumari and out of this wedlock two children were born and he further stated that since the time of marriage, due to disagreement with his wife, she chose to live in her maika. He further alleged that

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17631 of 2020(3) dt.11-07-2023 2/3

¶15

when the father and his mother was alone at her residence, they tried to throw down his mother. The father of the informant tried to save her mother then Kunal and his father has given stab blow on the father of informant and therefore, father of the informant was injured. When informant came to his house, then all accused persons beat him and took ornaments along with them, and also took Rs. 2 lakh 25 thousand.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that just because he had filed an informatory petition dated 22.10.2013 he has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioner and after investigation, the police found the allegation false against the petitioner and submitted final form. Exonerating Santosh Kuma, Bablu Kumar and Ravi Kumar.

¶17

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted the allegation levelled against the petitioner in the F.I.R.

¶18

The A.C.J.M.-XIV, Patna vide his order dated 10.01.2020 has differed with the final form and taken cognizance against the petitioner and other accused who were exonerated by the police. From reading of the impugned order dated 10.01.2020 it appears that there is no application of mind

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17631 of 2020(3) dt.11-07-2023 3/3

¶20

while taking cognizance against the accused who were exonerated by the police, this kind of order is no order in the eye of law.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pepsi foods ltd. and another vs Special Judicial Magistrate and others (1998) 5 SCC 749.

¶22

Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pepsi foods ltd. and another vs Special Judicial Magistrate and others (supra) and finding the impugned order an order without reasons this application is allowed.

¶23

Accordingly, the cognizance order dated 10.01.2020, passed by learned A.C.J.M.-XIV, Patna in Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 461 of 2019, is hereby quashed.

¶24

The proceedings with regard to other accused persons shall continue.

¶25

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶26

Guddu/-

¶27

U T

Bablu @ Bablu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu @ Bablu 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bipin Bihari Lal @ Bipin Bihari @ Lalla and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Sahdeo Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Kumar @ Bharat Sharma and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Miraj Master@ Meraj Ahmad @ Md. Miraj Vs The State of Bihar

Navin Chandra Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Sandip Kumar Thakur @ Sandip Thakur @ Sandeep Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance.