Usha Singh & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 May, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29385 of 2011
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -0 Year- null Thana -null District- BHOJPUR

1. Usha Singh, wife of late Shivendra Narayan Singh, resident of New
Chitragupt Nagar, P.S Patrakar Nagar, District Patna

2. Archana @ Archana Singh, wife of late Sunil Kumar Singh @ Lutan Singh,
resident of New Chitragupt Nagar, P.S Patrakar Nagar, District Patna

3. Anjali Singh Chauhan wife of Rahul Singh, resident of M.I.G. Flat
Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna

4. Vijay Kumar Singh @ Tutu Singh, son of Randhir Kumar Singh, resident of
Dariyapur at Fatuha, P.S. Fatuha, District Patna

…. …. Petitioners
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Smith Priya, daughter of Surendra Pd. Singh, resident of Rajendra Nagar,
District Ara

…. …. Opposite Parties

Appearance:

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Manisha Singh, Advocate
Mr. Prem Ranjan Raj, Advocate
Mr. Shayam Nandan Thakur, Advocate
For the Opp. Party No.2 : Mr. Aditya Narain Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. R.P. Nat, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 16-05-2017

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, learned

counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned APP for the State.

2. The present petition has been filed for quashing the order

dated 29.01.2010 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhojpur at Ara taking

cognizance against the petitioners in Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 249 of

2009/Tr. No. 2506 of 2010/G.R. No. 2394 of 2009 for the offences

under Sections 498A, 494/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

READ  Namdeo Dashrath Shinde And Ors.-vs-State Of Maharashtra on 16 March, 2007

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29385 of 2011 dt.16-05-2017 2

3. At the very outset learned Senior Counsel Mr. Ashok

Kumar Singh invites attention to impugned order dated 29.01.2010 by

which cognizance has been taken only against co-accused Atul Kumar

Singh and not against the petitioners. The said order of cognizance was

passed on the basis of interim charge sheet, but final investigation was

not yet complete at the relevant time. Learned Senior Counsel for the

petitioners has not been able to point out that any final police report

has since been submitted.

4. In the above view of the matter, this Court finds the present

petition at the instance of the petitioners premature. The same is

accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach once

again, if the situation so warrants in future.

5. Let the lower Court records be returned to the Court below

forthwith.

(Vikash Jain, J)
Chandran

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading 17.05.2017
Date
Transmission 17.05,.2017
Date

Leave a Comment

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