Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1923/2022dismissed

Shishupal Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-09-14Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1923 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2021 Thana- WARISLIGANJ District- Nawada ====================================================== SHISHUPAL SINGH Son of Late Harikant Singh @ Karu Singh Resident of Village- Mafi, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deepak Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-09-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

2. The present application has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing the order dated 10.12.2021 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge-XI, Nawada in Sessions Trial No. 292 of 2021 arising out of Warsiliganj P.S.Case No. 66 of 2021, whereby the petition for discharge filed by the petitioner has been rejected.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that initially the FIR was lodged under Section 365 of the IPC against unknown, but after recovery of the dead-body of deceased, Section 302 and other allied Sections of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1923 of 2022(2) dt.14-09-2023 2/2 IPC were added. Co-accused Bhola Singh was arrested and in his confessional statement the name of the petitioner has figured. He has submitted further that, during investigation, except the confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing against the petitioner and without applying its judicial mind, the learned court below has rejected the petition under Section 227 of the CrPC filed by the petitioner for his discharge.

4. It is settled principle that even strong suspicion is enough for framing of charge.

5. I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned court below.

6. The application is accordingly dismissed.

7. Office shall ensure that all the defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T