Dismissed¶29

Bane Imam @ Fazal Imam Malik v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jan 2025CR. APP (SJ)/1409/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of cognizance order refused; cognizance under IPC ss. 323, 354, 448, 427, 429 and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ss. 3(1)(f)(i)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) upheld; counter-FIR / cross-version occurrence; prima facie case made out; land-grab and hut/assault allegations; Sheikhpura (PS Case No. 203 of 2023); SC/ST Case No. 17 of 2023; delay of 271 days condoned; Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No. 1409 of 2024; decided 22-01-2025 by Rajiv Roy, J.

What did the court decide?

No relief on merits: the cognizance order dated 15.09.2023 was upheld and the appeal dismissed; the only indulgence granted was condonation of the 271-day filing delay. ¶29

Bane Imam @ Fazal Imam Malik Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief on merits: the cognizance order dated 15.09.2023 was upheld and the appeal dismissed; the only indulgence granted was condonation of the 271-day filing delay.

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 15.09.2023 of the Additional Session Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Sheikhpura in SC/ST Case No. 17 of 2023 taking cognizance against the appellants is erroneous and liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The Court found force in the learned Special PP's submission that an occurrence took place, reflected from the fact that the appellants themselves lodged an FIR and that there is a counter version, and that a prima facie case is made out.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

The delay of 271 days in filing the appeal stands condoned, there being no opposition from the opposite side.

¶22

Key takeaways

In view of the competing versions (appellants alleging land-grab by the complainant; complainant alleging the appellants were the aggressors who assaulted when objected to a hut constructed overnight), there is no error in the order dated 15.09.2023 taking cognizance against the appellants.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Rajiv Roy, J) dismissed Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1409 of 2024, by which four appellants sought quashing of the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the Additional Session Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Sheikhpura in SC/ST Case No. 17 of 2023 taking cognizance against them under sections 323, 354, 448, 427 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(1)(f)(i)(g), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The delay of 271 days in filing was first condoned unopposed (I.A. No. 01 of 2024). On merits, the Court found force in the Special PP's submission that an occurrence stood reflected from the appellants' own FIR and a counter version, making out a prima facie case; noting the competing versions — the appellants alleging the complainant conspired to grab their land, and the complainant alleging the appellants were the aggressors who assaulted when objecting to a hut constructed overnight — the Court held there was no error in the cognizance order and dismissed the appeal.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1409 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2023 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura

¶3

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

¶4

Bane Imam @ Fazal Imam Malik S/O Late Hasan Imam R/O VillageChewara, P.S- Chewara, Distt.- Sekhpura.

¶5

Munna Imam @ Khalid Imam S/O Hanu Imam R/O Village- Chewara, P.SChewara, Distt.- Sekhpura.

¶6

Rajiv Imam @ Imam Razi S/O Late Tunna Imam R/O Village- Chewara, P.S- Chewara, Distt.- Sekhpura.

¶7

Shafe Imam @ Imam Shafi S/O Late Tunna Imam R/O Village- Chewara, P.S- Chewara, Distt.- Sekhpura.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 22-01-2025 Heard the parties.

¶15

The present appeal has been preferred for the

¶16

quashing of order dated 15.09.2023, passed by learned Additional Session Judge-1^st -cum-Special Judge (SC/ST) Sheikhpura, in SC/ ST Case No. 17 of 2023, by which cognizance has been taken under section 323, 354, 448, 427 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(f)(i)(g), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the Appellants.

¶17

I.A. No. 01 of 2024

¶18

The Interlocutory Application has been preferred

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1409 of 2024(3) dt.22-01-2025 2/3

¶20

for condonation of delay of 271 days in filing the appeal.

¶21

Having gone through the facts of the case and there

¶22

is no opposition from the opposite side, the same is allowed. The delay of 271 days stands condoned.

¶23

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1409 of 2024

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellants submit that they reside outside for their livelihood, the complainant conspired and tried to grab the land, opposition took place, they lodged Sheikhpur P.S. Case No. 203 of 2023 and for the same occurrence, the present compliant which clearly show it as per thought.

¶25

Learned Special PP opposed the prayer for bail submitting that the fact remains that an occurrence took place which reflects from the fact that the appellants themselves have lodged an F.I.R, there is a counter version also and as such prima facie case is made out.

¶26

Having gone through the facts of the case and also the submissions of the parties, this Court find force in the submission of the learned Special PP. While the appellant alleges that the land belong to them, the other side tried to grab the land which resulted into the occurrence and lodging of the F.I.R., on the other hand the complainant has alleged that the

¶27

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1409 of 2024(3) dt.22-01-2025 3/3

¶28

appellants herein are the aggressor and when they objected to the presence of a hut which was constructed overnight, the assault took place. In that background, there is no error in the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge-1^st -cum-Special Judge (SC/ST) Sheikhpura in SC/ ST Case No. 17 of 2023 by which cognizance has been taken against the appellants.

¶29

In the opinion of the Court, there is no error in the order dated 15.09.2023. The appeal stands dismissed.

¶30

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶31

vinayak/-

¶32

U T

Bane Imam @ Fazal Imam Malik v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bane Imam @ Fazal Imam Malik v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Goutam Kumar @ Gautam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Singh Vs the Union of India through Director National Narcotics Department Bihar, Patna

Jogi Mahto @ Chhotu @ Mamu Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Jha @ Dipu Jha @ Deepak Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Kumar Vs the State of Bihar