Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49806/2013dismissed

Mushtaque @ Md. Mushtaque And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-04-07Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49806 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Mushtaque @ Md. Mushtaque, son of Late Nasir.

2. Jubrail @ Md. Juber, son of Late Nasir.

3. Md. Yasin, son of Late Nasir.

4. Kalam, son of Late Nasir.

5. Md. Rais, son of Md. Yasin.

6. Md. Shahid, son of Md. Yasin.

7. Md. Quddus @ Ghotu, son of Late Bashiruddin.

8. Md. Mansoor @ Babloo, son of Quddus.

All residents of village- Paiktola Chainpur, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria. .... .... Petitioners.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Braj Nandan Roy, son of Late Sri Nandan Roy.

3. Rabina Nandan Kumar Roy, son of Braj Nandan Roy.

4. Jitendra Kumar Roy, son of Braj Nandan Roy.

5. Madhu Bala Roy, daughter of Braj Nandan Roy.

6. Chanchal Kumari Roy, daughter of Braj Nandan Roy.

7. Ratna Kumari Roy, daughter of Braj Nandan Roy.

8. Suman Kumari Roy, daughter of Braj Nandan Roy. Nos.2 to 8 all are resident of village- Paiktola, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria. .... .... Opposite Parties.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the State : Mr. A.P.P. For the Opposite Party Nos.2 to 8 : M/s. A.P. Ambastha & B.K. Sinha, Advocates. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-04-2016 -------------- Heard.

2. This application under Section 482 filed on behalf of the petitioners is directed against the order dated 16.08.2013 passed in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2013, whereby the Sessions Judge, Purnea, dismissed the aforesaid Criminal Revision of the petitioners

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49806 of 2013 dt.07-04-2016 2/2 filed against the order dated 25.10.2012 passed in Case No.431-M of 2012/687 of 2012 by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Araria, converting the proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure into under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, directing both the parties to file their written statements.

3. On going through the impugned order, I find no illegality therein amounting to an abuse of the process of the court, calling for interference in an extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T