Allowed

Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Aug 2024CR. MISC./9220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order allowing the quashing of an FIR filed under various IPC and Arms Act sections. The petitioner claimed the case was settled years prior, witnesses were untraceable, and pendency hindered his job prospects as an A.P.O. candidate.

What did the court decide?

The prosecution of the petitioner in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 664 of 2013 was quashed.

Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9220 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-664 Year-2013 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

SANTOSH KUMAR YADAV @ SANTOSH KUMAR SON OF MAHTAB RAY R/O-SAGUNA, DANAPUR, P.S.-DANAPUR, DISTT.-PATNA

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

ARVIND KUMAR SON OF JANARDAN SINGH R/O-SAGUNA MORE, MANGALAM VIHAR COLONY, P.S.-DANAPUR, DISTT.-PATNA

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 08-08-2024 Heard the parties.

¶12

2. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.

¶13

¶14

3. The present application has been filed for quashing of the FIR bearing Danapur P.S. Case No. 664 of 2023 for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307, 379, 384 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

4. As per the prosecution story, the informant Arvind Kumar gave a written complaint to the police that when he was

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9220 of 2024(3) dt.08-08-2024 2/3

¶17

working at Mangalam Vihar Colony site which is situated at Danapur, some unknown persons came and threatened for ransom of Rs. 25 lakhs otherwise the work will not be allowed. On 02.12.2023, all named accused persons along with 50-60 persons armed with ‘ lathi ’ and ‘ pistol ’ and demolished the boundary wall after beating the informant and other labors and masons. In the process, informant was hit on the head by the butt of the pistol and Dinesh Choudhary also sustained injury. They are admitted in the hospital for treatment. It is further alleged that all the accused persons have stolen tools and mobile of labours and also took Rs. 1,20,000/- which was kept for the payment of materials. Accordingly, the FIR.

¶18

5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case was settled on 21.03.2014.

¶19

6. The informant of the case is not to be traced and he is not appearing and the petitioner is suffering since 2014. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has qualified in a exam for appointment of A.P.O. and because of the pendency of the case, he may have to suffer.

¶20

7. In these circumstances, this application is allowed. The prosecution of the petitioner in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 664 of 2013 is hereby quashed.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9220 of 2024(3) dt.08-08-2024 3/3

¶22

8. The photocopy of the certified copy of the

¶23

compromise petition is taken on record.

¶24

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

¶25

Jagdish/-

¶26

Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Kumar @ Vikas Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Niranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Deewakar Dwivedi Vs the State of Bihar

Dipak Purve @ Deepak Kumar Purbey Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Sah @ Pramod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pratibha Kumari Vs the State of Bihar