Mahesh Yadav And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21439 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -111 Year- 2012 Thana -DARBHANGA SADAR DistrictDARBHANGA ======================================================
1. Mahesh Yadav
2. Sushil Yadav
3. Satya Narain Yadav
4. Surendra Yadav All sons of Late Bindeshwar Yadav
5. Raju Kumar Yadav @ Praveen Yadav son of Surendra Yadav
6. Kaushal Kishore Yadav son of Sripati Lal Yadav
7. Rakesh Kumar Yadav @ Bablu Yadav son of Pradeep Yadav All residents of village Gausa, P.S. Darbhanga Sadar, district Darbhanga .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Santu Ram, son of Late Satahu Ram, resident of village Gausa, P.S. Darbhanga Sadar, district Darbhanga .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. None For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan( Spl.P.P.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-08-2016 Today again on call, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners. On perusal of the ordersheet, it appears that lastly the case was taken up on 14.05.2014, on which date also, there was non-appearance on behalf of the petitioners, whereas Sri Sadanand Paswan, learned Special Public Prosecutor is present. Seven petitioners, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 11.04.2014 passed by
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21439 of 2014 (3) dt.12-08-2016 2/2 the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Darbhanga in SC/ST Case no.208/14/ G.R. no.1045/12 arising out of Darbhanga Town P.S. Case no.111/12 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 341,323, 448, 354, 380, 427, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes( Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned Special Public Prosecutor, by way of referring to the impugned order as well as the F.I.R., submits that there is no ground for interference.
The petition stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U