Shankar Kumar Singh @ Shankar Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.21021 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -511 Year- 2011 Thana -BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CSAE DistrictBEGUSARAI ====================================================== Shankar Kumar Singh @ Shankar Kumar S/O Sadhu Sharan Singh @ Radhu Singh R/O Village- Ghonghsa, P.S.- Halsi, District- Lakhisarai .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shabnam Kumari W/O Shankar Kumar Singh @ Shankar Kumar, D/O Ram Naresh Singh R/O Village- Mahendrapur, P.S. Nayagaon, DistrictBegusarai .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== With Criminal Miscellaneous No.25395 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -511 Year- 2011 Thana -BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CSAE DistrictBEGUSARAI ======================================================
1. Sadhu Saran Singh Son of Late Deo Narain Singh
2. Kranti Devi Wife of Sadhu Saran Singh
3. Bambam Kumar @ Bambam Kumar Singh
4. Shivan Kumar Both are sons of Sadhu Saran Singh
5. Baby Kumari
6. Seema Kumari
7. Chamcham Kumari All are daughters of Sadhu Saran Singh, Resident of Village Ghonghsa, P.S.- Halsi, District- Lakhisarai .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shabnam Kumari Wife of Shankar Kumar Singh @ Shankar Kumar, D/O Ram Naresh Singh, Resident of Village Mahendrapur, P.S. Nayagaon, District-Begusarai .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.21021 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Mr. Ram Binay Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh-5(App)\\ (In Cr.Misc. No.25395 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan (App) ======================================================
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21021 of 2013 (5) dt.16-12-2016 2/3 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-12-2016 Since in both petitions, same order i.e. order of cognizance dated 18.05.2012 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in Complaint Case No.511(C)/2011 was challenged, both petitions were heard together and are being disposed of with this common order.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri (Dr.) Amrendra Kumar, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the complainant. The petitioners have assailed the order of cognizance raising a plea that entire family members have been made accused. However, after going through the impugned order, it is evident that the learned Magistrate, after examining the complainant on S.A. and three witnesses, who were examined during enquiry, has passed order of cognizance. It is not a case that the order of cognizance is without jurisdiction or there is any technical error. Only argument has been advanced to examine on merit. The Court is of the opinion that since the Code of Criminal Procedure itself provides certain remedy to accused persons, the order of cognizance in absence of any illegality may not be interfered with. Accordingly, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21021 of 2013 (5) dt.16-12-2016 3/3 It goes without saying that the petitioners would be at liberty to raise all the points, which have been taken in the present petition, before the court below at the appropriate stage. Accordingly, both petitions are disposed of.
In view of disposal of the present petition, the order of stay stands automatically vacated.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T