Pratap Kumar And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57450 of 2015 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-690 Year-2014 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Pratap Kumar 2.
Pravat Kumar @ Prabhat Kumar 3.
Pawan Kumar S/o Late Shyam Kishore Pandit All residents of Mohalla - Talipokhar, Jaiprakash Nagar, P.S. Aurangabad, Distt. - Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State Of Bihar 2.
Anjali Rani D/o Naresh Prasad and W/o Pawan Kumar Resident of in the house of Praveen Kumar, Mohalla - Gondapur, P.S. Nawada, Distt. - Nawada ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.S.M. Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of order dated 26.03.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Nagar P.S. Case No. 690 of 2014 registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 307, 504, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.
3. By order dated 07.04.2023, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since opposite party no. 2 is regularly getting maintenance amount, she is not interested in disposal of case in connection with Nagar P.S. Case No. 690 of 2014.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57450 of 2015(4) dt.16-08-2023 2/2
4. Today, Mr. Rana Vikram, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that out of seven witnesses, 5 witnesses have been examined and a false statement was made by learned counsel for the petitioner in this Court because of which further proceeding in the court below was stayed with regard to the petitioner.
5. This practice of making false statement by learned counsel for the petitioner is not appreciated by this Court. This Court is not inclined to entertain this application and hence this application is dismissed.
6. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and will not grant unnecessary adjournments to the accused persons and the trial must be concluded within three month of communication of this order.
7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Judge, Nawada for its compliance through FAX and email forthwith. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Harsh/ U T