Dismissed

Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC15 Dec 2023CR. REV./107/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Informant filed a revision against acquittal of the accused under Section 406 IPC despite conviction under Section 420 IPC. The court held the impugned order was appealable by the informant under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC and that the revision was not maintainable, dismissing it with liberty to file an appeal.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petitioner given liberty to prefer an appeal, subject to limitation.

Dilip Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.107 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-1997 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Supaul

¶3

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

¶4

Dilip Kumar, S/o Late Bisheshwar Swarnkar Resident of Mansapur, Ward No. 17, P.S. and P.O.- Karjain, District- Supaul.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar

¶8

Kanhaiya Lal Das, S/o Late Nunulal Das Resident of Village- Mahthawa, P.O.- Mahthawa Bazar, P.S.- Bhargama, District - Araria

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 15-12-2023

¶12

Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner on repeated calls.

¶13

On perusal of the impugned order, it is found that in Case No. 306 C of 1997, filed by the Informant, the accused / Opposite party was convicted under the charge of Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to simple imprisonment for three years with fine. However, he was acquitted of the charge under Section 406 of the IPC.

¶14

Being aggrieved against the order of acquittal of the charge under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, passed on 10^th of February, 2016, the Informant has preferred the instant Revision.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.107 of 2019(3) dt.15-12-2023 2/2

¶16

It is needless to say that in view of the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which came into force w.e.f. 31^st of December, 2009, the impugned order is appealable at the instance of the Informant. The Revision is not maintainable.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant Revision is dismissed.

¶18

However, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an

¶19

appeal if advised, subject to limitation.

¶20

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)

¶21

skm/-

¶22

Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Anr.

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

Ranjit Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Rinki Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Ganpat Patel Vs Sinju Devi @ Sindhu Devi And Ors.

Abdul Razzaque Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Golden Kumar @ Golden Singh Vs The State of Bihar