Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13587/2015allowed

Surendra Sahni And ANR. v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-04-08Mr. Justice Birendra Prasad Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.13587 of 2015 In Cr.Revision No.519 of 2012 ======================================================

1. Surendra Sahni

2. Ram Narayan Sahni Both sons of Late Saral Sahni, Resident of village - Bagahi, P.S. Darpa, District - East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Naresh Sahni, Son of Late Kripa Sahni, Resident of village - Bagahi, P.S. Darpa, District - East Champaran .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uma Kant Shukla Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar Mr.Rajesh Ranjan Mr.Pankaj Kumar For the Opposite Party no.1 : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2015 Cr.Misc.No.13587 of 2015 The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for restoration of Cr. Revision No.519 of 2012, which stood rejected on account of non-compliance of the Court's order dated 29.06.2012 passed by this Bench.

After having heard the parties and for the reasons disclosed in the present application, the prayer for restoration is allowed. Cr. Revision No.519 of 2012 is restored to its original file.

The present application stands finally disposed of. Cr. Revision No.519 of 2012 With the consent of the parties, the present matter has been taken up for consideration on merit.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13587 of 2015 (2) dt.08-04-2015 The petitioners have filed the present revision application questioning the validity of the order dated 19.01.2009 passed in Session Trial No.624 of 2006, whereby the prayer made on their behalf for discharging them from the criminal trial in terms of Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. After having heard the parties, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere with the order dated 19.01.2009 passed by the learned trial court. Accordingly, the present revision application is dismissed.

However, if the aforesaid trial has not been concluded as yet, then the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all the pleas, which have been raised in the present petition, during the course of their trial.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Arvind/- U T