Dismissed

MD Rahman v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Apr 2023CR. MISC./4425/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition to quash the Additional District and Sessions Judge's order dismissing the petitioner's juvenility claim, raised for the first time in 2022 despite the FIR being from 2009. The High Court held the speaking order could not be interfered with, dismissed the petition as an attempt to delay trial, and directed early conclusion of the trial.

What did the court decide?

None granted; trial court directed to conclude the trial at the earliest.

MD Rahman Vs The State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4425 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2009 Thana- BHAWANIPUR District- Purnia

¶3

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

¶4

MD RAHMAN Son of Md Mukhtar R/V- Jamun Tola, Bhameth PSBhawanipur Dist- Purnea

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

Najbin @ Bibi Najbin D/o Md Gyash R/V- Jamun Tola, Bhameth PSBhawanipur Dist- Purnea

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 12-04-2023 Heard the parties.

¶12

This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.11.2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, 1^st Purnea in S.T. Case No. 956 of 2010 / CIS No. 3614 of 2013 arising out of Bhawanipur P.S. Case No. 134 of 2009, by which the learned Court below has dismissed the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner raising the plea that he is a juvenile.

¶13

From the record it appears that though the F.I.R. is of the year 2009 but for the first time the petitioner has raised the plea of juvenility in the year 2022 in Session Trial No. 956 of 2010 (CIS No. 3614 of 2013). Before 2022 the petitioner has

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4425 of 2023(2) dt.12-04-2023 2/2

¶15

not raised the ground of juvenility.

¶16

Further, the impugned order is a speaking order and it has been passed after considering the materials relied upon by the learned Trial Judge and therefore, the same cannot be interfered at this stage.

¶17

It seems that the petitioner is interested only in delaying the trial.

¶18

In view of the above, this application is dismissed.

¶19

The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner at the earliest.

¶20

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Judge, Purnea through FAX and e-Mail for its compliance forthwith.

¶21

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶22

Vikas/Shishir

¶23

MD Rahman v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Rahman 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

Amar Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Shivji Singh and Anr. Vs The State of Bihar And Anr.

Sanjay Singh and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Suresh Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna and Ors.

Raj Rajendra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna and Ors.

Avinash Kumar @ Chandan Vs The State of Bihar