Dismissed¶20

Umesh Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Feb 2024CR. MISC./14005/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, single Judge (Satyavrat Verma, J.), order dated 01-02-2024: quashing application Crl. Misc. No. 14005 of 2022 (Umesh Singh v. The State of Bihar and Baidyanath Sahu) arising out of FIR being P.S. Case No. 24 of 2021, Thana Dehri Town, District Rohtas, rejected/dismissed; Court declined to interfere with police investigation at the FIR stage on the APP's submission that investigation 'should not be nipped in the bud'; petitioner's recourse noted as approaching the concerned Superintendent of Police; no statutory provision or precedent discussed; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

Declining to entertain the quashing application, the Court accepted the learned APP's submission that police investigation should not be nipped in the bud. ¶14

Umesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14005 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2021 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas

¶3

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

¶4

Umesh Singh Son Of Basawan Mahto Resident Of Village- Makarain, Dalmiyanagar, P.S.- Dehri (TOWN), District- Rohtas. Proprietor Of Messrs Maa Khad Bhandar, Khudra Khad Vikreta, Makrain, Rohtas

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar BIHAR

¶8

Baidyanath Sahu Son Of Late Brijnandan Prasad Sahu Resident Of VillageManda, District- Samastipur. Presently Working At The Post Of Fertilizer Inspector, Incharge Cum Block Agriculture Officer Nasriganj, DistrictRhtas

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh No.10, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 01-02-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

In the nature of prayer made in the quashing application the Court is not inclined to entertain the same as it has been submitted by the learned APP, Mr. Rabindra Kumar that police investigation should not be nipped in the bud.

¶15

It is also submitted that if what has been pleaded in the quashing application are true facts in that event the petitioner can bring those facts to the notice of the concerned Superintendent of Police, but then the court should be reluctant in interfering in investigation at the stage when FIR has been

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14005 of 2022(4) dt.01-02-2024 2/2

¶17

instituted.

¶18