Rajiv Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4029 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-517 Year-2016 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Rajiv Kumar S/o Kamta Singh, R/o Mohalla- Vishnupuri, Bhikhachak, P.O. Anisabad, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar 2.

Sanjay Chauhan S/o Shri Shiv Nandan Chauhan, R/o Mohanpur, Punaichak, P.O. and Shastrinagar, District- Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-12-2023

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that a purely civil dispute was given a criminal colour and the instant criminal case was instituted one year after the suit for specific performance was instituted by the O.P. No.2 herein in which the petitioner had appeared and filed his written statement. The learned counsel submits that it was only after the petitioner appeared in the suit for specific performance filed by the O.P. No.2 and filed his written statement and then the present criminal case came to be instituted.

3. On query of the Court with regard to the stage of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4029 of 2018(2) dt.20-12-2023 2/2 the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly submits that charges have been framed, trial has commenced and the witnesses have been examined.

4. The learned APP Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay submits that if what has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is true and the same also surfaces during the course of the trial, the learned trial court will correctly appreciate the facts of the case.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner thus seeks permission to withdraw the quashing application.

6. Permission is accorded.

7. The present quashing application is dismissed as withdrawn.

8. The Court expects that the trial shall be concluded expeditiously.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T