Surendra Chaudhary And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52493 of 2015 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2009 Year-2014 Thana- DARBHANGA COMPLAINT CASE District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Prabhat Ranjan Son of Sri Vijay Shankar Arya, Resident of Lalan Apartment, 2nd Floor, Road, No.1, Water Tank in front of Ice Factory, Rajendra Nagar, Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar and Anr 2.

Jai Narayan Lal, Son of Dhruv Narayan Lal, Resident of Village- Baheri, P.S. Baheri, District Darbhanga.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Zainul Abedinapp ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-09-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State along with the learned counsel for the informant.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present application has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 13.07.2015 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Complaint Case No. C1-2009 of 2014 whereby cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. On query of the Court from the learned counsel for the petitioner that what is the present stage of the case as cognizance was taken on 13.07.2015, the learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52493 of 2015(2) dt.01-09-2023 2/2 petitioner is not in a position to seek instruction from the petitioner but submits that it appears that till date charges have not been framed.

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to entertain the present quashing application, however, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise all issues at the time of framing of charges if the charges have not been framed till date.

5. Accordingly, the present quashing application stands dismissed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) HarshPandey/- U T