← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6047/2019dismissed

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Bihar, Patna And ORS v. Sudarshan Ram And ORS

2026-01-20Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6047 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2014 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Bihar, Patna BIHAR 2.

The Additional Director General of Police (CID), Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Superintendent of Police, (CID), Muzaffarpur. 4.

The investigating Officer, Sakra P.S. Case No. 187/14 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Sudarshan Ram Son of Vishwanath Ram Resident of Village Parmanandpur, P.S. Sonpur Nayagawan District Chapra at Present Posted as Inspector of Police, Jamui.

2.

Vikki Baitha @ Vikash Baitha, Son of Late Shankar Baitha, resident of village Mirapur Mohan P.S Sakra District- Muzaffarpur. 3.

Abhishek Sharma @ Abhay Kumar @ Tunnu Sharma Son of Ganesh Thakur resident of village Mirapur Mohan Police Station Sakra DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mrigendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. G.A. 4 For the O.P. No. 02 :

Mr. Pradhan Murli Manohar Prasad Mr. Raju Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been filed against the order dated 17.04.2017 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur (East) in connection with Sakra P.S. Case No. 187 of 2014.

3. From perusal of the records, it appears that the aggrieved party in this case is opposite party no. 3 but the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6047 of 2019(7) dt.20-01-2026 2/2 quashing application has been preferred by the State on his behalf as the State is not an aggrieved party.

4. In the opinion of this Court, if the aggrieved party is opposite party no. 03 then he could have preferred an application for quashing but he has not done so.

5. In view of the above, this application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U