IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1179 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR)
1. Naresh Kumar son of Bhuneshwar Singh
2. Anil Kumar son of Bhuneshwar Singh
3. Lalo Devi @ Lalita Devi wife of Anil Kumar
4. Suresh Singh son of Bhuneshwar Singh
5. Arnika Bharti @ Amika Kumari wife of Suresh Singh all are resident of village-
Dih Gaupur, Jogi Asthan, P.O.,- Gaupur, P.S.- Ujiyarpur, District- Samastipur
6. Gaytri Devi, wife of Muneshwar Singh wrongly described as Bhuneshwar
Singh
7. Muneshwar Singh, wrongly described as Bhuneshwar Singh son of Late
Balgovind Singh,
petitioner nos. 6 7 are resident of village- Dih Gaupur, Jogi Asthan, P.O.-
Gaupur, P.S.- Ujiyarpur, District- Samastipur
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Patna , Bihar
2. Pratima Raj @ Dauli, wife of Naresh K umar, resident of village- Dih Gaupur,
Jogi Asthan, P.O.- Gaupur, P.S.- Ujiyarpur, District- Samastipur, at present
resident of daughter of Anirudh Singh, Village+ P.O. + P.S.- Jandaha, District-
Vaishali
…. …. Respondent/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Prasad, GP-18
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 08-12-2017
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners are husband and in-laws of respondent
No.2 Pratima Raj @ Dauli. Pratima Raj @ Dauli initially filed
Complaint Case No.1042 of 2015, under Section 498A of the Indian
Penal Code, against the petitioners in the Court of learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Hajipur, Vaishali. Thereafter, she filed
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1179 of 2015 dt.08-12-2017
P3/
Samastipur Mahila P.S. Case No.14 of 2015 against the petitioners.
In both the cases, the date of occurrence is mentioned as 18.06.2014
and onwards. In both the cases the specific date of occurrence of
assault is mentioned as 03.01.2015.
3. The present application has been preferred for quashing
the cognizance order dated 14.07.2015, vide Annexure-4, passed in
the above complaint case and for quashing the cognizance order dated
07.09.2015 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-I, Samastipur, in the police case. Alternative prayer is for
amalgamation of the complaint case with the police case.
4. So far merit in the submission for quashing is
concerned, on the basis of material on the record, this Court is not
inclined to quash the cognizance orders. However, it cannot be
disputed that these cases should be tried by one Court.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that
considering the convenience of respondent No.2, the cases be tried at
Vaishali at Hajipur.
6. In the circumstances, it is ordered that the trial of
Samastipur Mahila P.S. Case No.14 of 2015 be transferred to the
District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, who shall assign the
record to the Magistrate before whom the aforesaid complaint case is
pending and shall ensure that both the cases be tried by one and the
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1179 of 2015 dt.08-12-2017
P3/
same presiding officer and both the cases shall be tried as a police
case in view of the provisions of Section 210(2) Cr.P.C.
7. With the aforesaid observation, this application stands
disposed of.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 12.12.2017
Transmission 12.12.2017
Date
