Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19425/2014dismissed

Anchal Kumar Pandey @ Anchal Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-02Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19425 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2012 Thana -BUXAR INDUSTRIAL District- BUXAR ====================================================== Anchal Kumar Pandey @ Anchal Pandey Son of Kanhaiya Pandey, resident of village- Harikishunpur, P.S.- Buxar (Industrial Area), DistrictBuxar .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rana Ishwar Chandra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-08-2016 Heard Sri Rana Ishwar Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anant Kumar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

The sole petitioner has approached this Court, invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash an order dated 24.09.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Buxar in Buxar (Industrial ) P.S. Case No.30/2012, G.R. No.652 /2012, Tr. No.2718/2012. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has rejected the petition for discharge filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19425 of 2014 (2) dt.02-08-2016 2/2 case. There was no material in the case diary, even then the petitioner was forwarded as accused and even the discharge petition was not considered properly. He submits that some of the witnesses, who have supported the prosecution case, are interested witnesses. Accordingly, he has made a prayer for quashing the impugned order.

Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the materials on record including the impugned order. After going through the impugned order, the Court is satisfied that the learned Magistrate has committee no error in passing the order. The petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U