Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenged rejection of a Section 227 discharge application in a dowry death sessions trial. Since charge had already been framed and prosecution evidence was being led, the court, relying on Supreme Court precedent, held discharge was no longer permissible and dismissed the petition.
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 MISCELLANEOUS No.6764 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2019 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
Bhupesh Kumar @ Bhupesh Kumar Singh Son of Jitendra Kumar Singh R/vHulaspatti, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr.Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Madhuri Lata, A.P.P. Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Adv. Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
A.P.P. for the State.
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) for quashing the order dated 25.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jhanjharpur (Madhubani) in Sessions Trial No. 297 of 2021, arising out of Phulparas P.S. Case No. 44 of 2019 punishable for the offence under Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby the application filed for discharge of petitioner under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6764 of 2023(2) dt.26-02-2024 2/2
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. is maintainable after charge has been framed under Section 228 and trial has commenced.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ratilal Bhanji Muthani vs. State of MaharastraRelied on¶4
A.I.R. 1979 SC 94 · Who else cites this
Stree Atyachar Veerodi Parishadh vs. Dilip Nathumal ChordiyaRelied on¶4
1989 S.C.C. (1) 715 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Bhupesh Kumar @ Bhupesh Kumar Singh
The State of Bihar
Binyanand Singh
Prabhat Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
