Ankit Kumar Sinha @ Ankit Sinha & … vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 22 September, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16079 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -507 Year- 2012 Thana -PURNIA COMPLAINT CASE District-
PURNIA

1. Ankit Kumar Sinha @ Ankit Sinha S/O Murari Pd.

2. Murari Pd. S/O Rudra Narain Pd.

3. Nilam Devi W/O Murari Pd. All Are Resident Of Mohalla – Gulzar Bagh, B.N.R.
Training College Near, Pathari Ghat, P.S. – Alamganj, Dist. – Patna

…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Anshu Kumari W/O Sri Ranjit Kumar Sinha, D/O Sri Abhay Kumar Sinha
Resident Of Mohalla – Mahabala, P.S. – Rupauli, Dist. – Purnea

…. …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tilak Sao
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 22-09-2017

Heard both the parties.

Petitioners, by means of this application under section

482 of the Cr. P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this

Court with prayer to quash the order dated 15.05.2013 passed by

S.D.J.M., Purnea in Complaint Case No. 507 of 2012, whereby

cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offence

under section 498A of the I.P.C.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is

that no offence against the petitioners is disclosed and the present

prosecution has been instituted with mala fide intention for the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16079 of 2014 dt.22-09-2017

2/3

purposes of harassment.

Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the

application by contending that there are allegations against the

petitioners and no ground for quashing the entire proceedings is made

out.

From perusal of the materials available on record and

looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no

offence is made out against the petitioners. All the submissions made

at bar relates to the disputed questions of facts, which cannot be

adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under

section 482 Cr. P.C. Only a prima facie satisfaction of the Court about

the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required.

At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law

laid down by the Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vrs. State of

Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vrs. Bhajan Lal,

1992 SCC (Cr,) 426, State of Bihar Vrs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC

(Cr.) 192, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vrs. Mohd. Saraful

Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and recently in

A.R.C.I. Vrs. Nimra Cerglass Technics (P) Ltd. (2016) 1 SCC 348.

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners call

for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately

gone into by the Trial Court in this case. This Court does not deem it
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16079 of 2014 dt.22-09-2017

3/3

proper, and therefore, cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before

the actual trial begins. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be

considered at this stage. Moreover, the petitioners have got a right of

discharge through a proper application for the said purpose and they

are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application

before the Trial Court. The prayer for quashing the order taking

cognizance is refused.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.

(Arvind Srivastava, J)

Shailendra/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 25.07.2017
Uploading Date 23.09.2017
Transmission 23.09.2017
Date

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *