Anil Kumar @ Anil Kumar Palangi @ Anil Kumar Hooda v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.386 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-672 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Jamui ====================================================== Anil Kumar @ Anil Kumar Palangi @ Anil Kumar Hooda S/O Raj Singh Hooda Resident of Village/Mohalla- D-92, D-Block, Yadav Nagar, P.SSamaypur, Distt.- North West Delhi- 110042. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar Bihar 2.

The Director General of Police, Patna. Bihar 3.

The Superintendent of Police, Jamui. Bihar 4.

The Officer-In-Charge, Jamui Bihar 5.

Dr. Anil Prasad Singh S/O Late Yadunandan Singh R/O Jai Maa Kali Narshing Home, Hospital Road, P.S- Jamui, Distt.- Jamui (Propritor Amritesh Agro Products Private Limted, Basbatia Madhopur, P.SChandramandi, Distt.- Jamui). ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shambhu Sn Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr. G.P.26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This application has been filed for seeking following reliefs:

(i) For quashing the entire proceeding against the petitioner on the complaint filed by the private respondent no. 6. A compliant case filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui vide complaint case no. 679C/2024 dated 25.06.2024 with false and concocted prosecution story since the petitioner has no concern with the respondent no. 6 and the learned Court below concern has found no material U/s 420, 467, 406, 468, 471 IPC, since

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.386 of 2025(2) dt.22-07-2025 2/2 the complaint and other enquiry witnesses are silent on those points but the cognizance was taken on 21.09.2024 only U/s 138 N.I. Act against this petitioner through the petitioner has also no concern with any type of instrument with the respondent.

(ii) For Award of proper compensation against the respondent no. 6, for harassment to the petitioner on the basis of such type of false and fabricated complaint case, after holding an appropriate enquiry form any competent agencies.

(iii) For compensation also against the state authority/jail authority for their idle deal in the case of petitioner whereby the petitioner had to spent so many days in custody after granting bail.

3. In my opinion, an appropriate application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. is maintainable in the facts of the case.

4. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to convert this application into an application for quashing within one week.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) anand/- U T