SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Krishna Prasad Yadav @ Krishna … vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 4 September, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55979 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2015 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Gaya

1. Krishna Prasad Yadav @ Krishna Yadav, Son of Late Kameshwar Yadav

2. Ravi Yadav, Son of Krishna Prasad Yadav @ Krishna Yadav

3. Rekha Devi, D/o Krishna Prasad Yadav @ Krishna Yadav

4. Kanti Devi, Wife of Ravi Yadav, All resident of Village Nimthu, P.S.
Nimchak Bathani, District Gaya.

… … Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Rekha Devi, D/o of Ramanand Yadav, Wife of Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev
Ranjan, resident of Village Tetua Birar, P.S. Atri, District Gaya
… … Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. A. Jaiswal, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 04-09-2019

Heard the parties.

2. By the impugned order dated 11.08.2015, the learned

Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya took cognizance in connection

with Mahila P.S. Case No. 02 of 2015 and ordered issuance of

summons against the accused person to face trial for offences

under Sections 498A and Section494 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn

attention of the Court towards the charge sheet submitted in the

aforesaid police case and submits that, in fact, the petitioners were

not sent up for trial, rather only husband of the informant, namely,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55979 of 2015 dt.04-09-2019
2/2

Rajeev Ranjan @ Rajeev Kumar was sent up to face trial for

offences under Sections 498A and Section494 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. However, the learned court below in a mechanical

manner recorded that charge sheet has been submitted against the

petitioners also.

5. Since the impugned order apparently suffers from

non-application of judicial mind, the same is not sustainable in law

for the simple reason that it would lead to miscarriage of justice.

Hence, it stands set aside and the matter is remitted back to the

learned court below to pass fresh order after going through the

material collected during investigation of the case, according to

law, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order.

6. Accordingly, this application stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J)

Kundan/-

AFR/NAFR N.A.
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 06.09.2019
Transmission Date 06.09.2019

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation