Allowed

Mahtab Alam @ Lal Babu v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jul 2024CR. MISC./25743/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of orders directing issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. The High Court allowed the application, quashing the impugned orders with liberty to file fresh process in accordance with law and Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of orders dated 04.03.2024 and 26.04.2024; liberty to file fresh requisition in accordance with law.

Mahtab Alam @ Lal Babu Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25743 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Mahtab Alam @ Lal Babu Son Of Mahammad Zaad Resident Of Mohalla - Takiya Yakub, P.S. - Gopalganj, District - Gopalganj

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr.Niranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

4 08-07-2024

¶9

Heard Mr. P. N. Shahi, learned senior counsel for the

¶10

petitioner; learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶11

The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

¶12

“That, this application is being preferred on behalf of the petitioner above named for quashing of the order dated 04.03.2024 passed by the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, whereby and whereunder the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj has mechanically and erroneously issued the direction for proclamation under Section-82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in teeth of the provisions of the Cr. P.C. in connection with Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 118/2024 dated 13.02.2024 registered for offences under Sections 302/120B/34 of IPC, although petitioner is availing his remedy embodied

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25743 of 2024(4) dt.08-07-2024 2/3

¶14

under the provision of Cr. P.C. and Constitution of India by filing Anticipatory Bail application under Section-438 of Cr. P.C. and also filing Cr. W.J.C. No. 541/2024 before the Hon'ble Patna High Court, Patna, in the interest of justice. And also to quash the application of the Investigating Officer dated 24.02.2024, by which illegally and hurriedly made prayer for issuance of direction under Section-82 & 83 jointly of the Cr. P.C. within 15 days of lodging the alleged FIR and further be pleased to stay the operation of the order dated 04.03.2024 in connection with Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 118/2024.”

¶15

It has been submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders dated 04.03.2024 and 26.04.2024 have illegally been issued as the same are in teeth of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State through CBI v. Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar & Ors. reported in (2000) 10 SCC 438 and Krishna Murari Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2005(3) PLJR 746 .

¶16

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that he has no objection if the illegal orders are quashed with liberty to pray for fresh process in accordance with law.

¶17

In these circumstances, with consent of the parties, this application is allowed.

¶18

Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 04.03.2024 and 26.04.2024 are quashed with liberty to the prosecution to

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25743 of 2024(4) dt.08-07-2024 3/3

¶20

file fresh requisition in accordance with law. If and when the prosecution files such application, the Magistrate shall pass an order after going through the judgment of this Court in the case of State through CBI v. Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar (supra) and Krishna Murari Yadav (supra).

¶21

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that the police has all powers to arrest an accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and therefore, even if no process is issued still the police can arrest an accused.

¶22

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶23

P. Kumar

¶24

U T

Mahtab Alam @ Lal Babu v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahtab Alam @ Lal Babu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Pappu Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Tiwari @ Anupam Rahul Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Tinku Alam @ Ehsan Alam Vs The State of Bihar