The petition for quashing of a cognizance order was disposed of as infructuous because the petitioners had already been discharged by the trial court in the underlying complaint case.
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.911 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-657 Year-2016 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indra Mohan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mithilesh Kumar Khare, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER
482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the cognizance order dated 04.08.2017/18.08.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bikramganj, Rohtas in Complaint Case No. 657 of 2016.
dated 19th September, 2025, learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram has sent status report with respect to Complaint Case No. 657 of 2016 showing that the petitioners have already been discharged on 31.05.2024.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.911 of 2018(3) dt.28-01-2026 2/2
has become infructuous, accordingly, the same may be disposed of.
and report of the learned Trial Court, this case is disposed of having become infructuous.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.)
rakhi/-
U T
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arvind Singh @ Dablu Singh
Bablu Singh
Heera Shankar Singh
State Of Bihar
Bimala Devi
Sunil Dutta Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
