Md. Mukhtar @ Maulana Mukhtar Rizwi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8649 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2014 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== 1.
MD. MUKHTAR @ MAULANA MUKHTAR RIZWI and ORS S/o Sri Sultan Muriari 2.
Kausar Jahan W/o Md. Maulana Mukhtar Rizwi 3.
Md. Qamruzzman @ Guddu S/o Maulana Mukhtar Rizwi All resident of village- Manjhauli, P.S.- Dumraon, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ravindra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. J.Upadhyayapp ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-09-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present application has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 16.06.2014 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghatti, Gaya in connection with complaint case No. 212 of 2014 whereby cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. On query of the Court from the learned counsel for the petitioners that what is the stage of the case after cognizance was taken on 16.06.2014, the learned counsel very fairly
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8649 of 2016(2) dt.01-09-2023 2/2 submits that the stage has changed, charges have been framed and the trial has commenced.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has not received any instructions from the petitioners but then he himself very verified from the website of E-Court Services and from perusal of the same, it appears that the charges have been framed and the trial has commenced.
5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Court is not inclined to entertain the present quashing application.
6. Accordingly, the present quashing application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) HarshPandey/- U T