This short order dismisses the criminal revision by the petitioner challenging the mandatory issuance of notice against him despite lack of a Protection Officer's report, finding no effective order passed by the Magistrate.
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 REVISION No.68 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2016 Thana- DOMESTIC VIOLENACE District- Patna
======================================================
Raj Kumar Yadav S/o Late Narayan Yadav Resident of Mohalla-Danka Kuncha Sadar Gali,P.S. Khajekalan,Distt.-Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Mouar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner has moved this Court with a limited grievance that the learned Magistrate has issued notice to him without considering the Protection Officer’s report.
3. From the impugned order dated 18.08.2016, it appears that the records of the case was received in the court of learned S.D.J.M, Patna City from the court of learned A.C.J.M., Patna City. The learned Magistrate heard learned counsel for the applicant, called for the Protection Officer’s report and at the same time issued notice to the opposite party.
4. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order which has been dismissed by the learned Additional
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.68 of 2019(3) dt.08-12-2023 2/2
District and Sessions Judge-1st, Patna City. The learned appellate court has taken a view that while the learned Magistrate is duty bound to take into consideration the domestic incident report received from the Protection Officer, in order to comply with the principles of natural justice, he has issued notice to the opposite parties. The appellate court has, therefore, taken a view that a direction to issue notice to the opposite parties cannot be said to be an order passed by the Magistrate without considering the Protection Officer’s report. There being no effective order.
5. This Court finds that the learned Magistrate while passing the impugned order has not passed any effective order. Only a notice was issued. More than 7 years have gone thereafter.
6. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order. This revision application is dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
arvind/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the New Criminal Procedure Code due process requires the issuance of notice without considering the Protection Officer's report.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the impugned order directed against the petitioner during domestic violence proceedings.
Raj Kumar Yadav
The State Of Bihar
Smt. Chandni Kumari
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
