Pramod Rai And ANR v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.776 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- BHOJPUR ===========================================================
1. Pramod Rai S/o Mangal Rai
2. Mangal Rai S/o Late Yamuna Rai Both Resident of Village Dulamchak, P.S. Chawary, District Bhojpur at Arrah (Bihar). .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Inspector General of Police, Shahabad Range, Arrah, District Bhojpur (Bihar).
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Shahabad Range, Arrah, District Bhojpur (Bihar).
4. The Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Arrah, District Bhojpur (Bihar).
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur at Arrah, District Bhojpur (Bihar).
6. The Officer in-charge, Sahar Police Station, Bhojpur, District Bhojpur at Arrah (Bihar). .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivekanand Singh, AC to GA-8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner seeks quashing of the first information report of Sahar P.S. Case No. 30 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as 27 of the Arms Act.
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.776 of 2014 dt.20-02-2015 2 / 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the case with ulterior motive. On the relevant date of occurrence, one of the petitioner, namely, Pramod Rai had attended the Court proceeding. The petitioners have sought for an information from police under the Right to Information Act but no information is being supplied by the police. It has further been submitted that the entire prosecution case is based on suspicion and on such allegation, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted. It has further been contended that the deceased was a man of criminal antecedent. I have perused the FIR. I find that the allegations made in the first information report attract ingredients of culpable homicide amounting to murder. The plausible defence of the accused cannot be a ground for quashing FIR while matter is still under investigation.
In that view of the matter, I find no merit in this application. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Sanjeet/- U T