Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33168/2021allowed

Jaigovind Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2021-08-18Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 33168 of 2021 Arising out of CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 31869 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2020 Thana- MADANPUR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Jaigovind Ram, Male, aged about 45 years, Son of Rambarat Ram, Resident of Village - Khutidih, PS- Madanpur, District - Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 18-08-2021 The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner has moved the Court seeking modification in the judgment and order dated 02.03.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31869 of 2020.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to inadvertent typographical error, the name of the father of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33168 of 2021 dt.18-08-2021 2/3 petitioner was wrongly typed in the main petition of Cr. Misc. No. 31869 of 2020 inasmuch as, the name of the father of the petitioner has been typed as Karamu Ram instead of Rambarat Ram. It was submitted that the Court may permit correction in the cause title of the main petition of Cr. Misc. No. 31869 of 2020 and such correction be also made in the cause title of the judgment and order dated 02.03.2021 of the said case. Further, it was submitted that since the time granted to the petitioner to surrender before the Court below has elapsed, the Court may extent the period.

5. Learned APP does not oppose.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds that in view of there being inadvertent typographical error, the prayer for modification is bona fide.

7. Accordingly, let learned counsel for the petitioner make correction in the name of the father of the petitioner in the cause title of the main petition of Cr. Misc. No. 31869 of 2020 and as a consequence such correction be also made in the name of the father of the petitioner in the cause title of the judgment and order dated 02.03.2021 in the said case, as indicated above. Further, the time granted to the petitioner to surrender before the Court below

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33168 of 2021 dt.18-08-2021 3/3 and seek bail stands extended by a further period of six weeks from today.

8. The petition stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T