Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29386/2022dismissed

Uday Nath Puri @ Uday Puri v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-10Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29386 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2020 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== Uday Nath Puri @ Uday Puri Son of panchanand Puri Resident of Village - Anyay, Post office - Babhangawan, Police Station - Parsa, District - Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Govind Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 17.06.2020 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-Ist, Chapra in Parsa Police Station Case No. 27/2020 and Regd. ST POCSO No. 10/20 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner and issue non-bailable warrant.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant namely Anita Devi, wife of Shambhu Rai, resident of VillageMujauna, Police District-Saran Station- Parsa, instituted First Information Report alleging therein that her daughter, aged about 14 years, went for natural call outside the house. The informant further alleged that when she did not return the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29386 of 2022(2) dt.10-07-2025 2/2 informant and others started searching her. The informant further alleged that her daughter was found at some distance from the house in unconscious position. The informant further alleged that the petitioner was identified along with one unknown person to be involved in the crime.

4. The name of the petitioner has come during investigation and chargesheet has been submitted against him. Thereafter, cognizance has been taken.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his prosecution may be quashed because he is not named in the FIR.

6. A person may not be named in the FIR but if his name transpires during investigation, he can be proceeded against. As the petitioner has been charge-sheeted, I see no reason to interfere by examining the defence of the petitioner.

7. This application is dismissed.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T