Patna High CourtCR. MISC./605/2018dismissed

Deepak Singh And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2019-10-15Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.605 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2014 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna ======================================================

1. Deepak Singh Son of Ganga Bishun Singh.

2. Bigan Singh @ Om Prakash , Son of Satya Narayan Singh.

3. Rohit Singh Son of Devendra Singh.

4. Jitendra Singh Son of Satya Narayan Singh. 5.Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Singh Son of Triveni Singh.

6. Sanjay Kumar @ Sunni Kumar Son of Bhopin Singh.

7. Laldeo Singh Son of Ram Parmeshwar Singh.

8. Ram Prasad Singh Son of Ram Bujhawan Singh.

9. Bharat Singh Son of Late Indradeo Singh.

10. Subodh Singh Son of Baleshwar Singh.

11. Bunti Kumar @ Mantu Singh @ Mantu Son of Shiv Shankar Singh.

12. Shalendra Singh Son of Thakur Shachida Nand Singh.

13. Indra Lal Singh @ Indra Mani Singh @ Indra Mani Son of Deo Sharan Singh.

14. Upendra Singh Son of Deo Bahadur @ Deo Sharan Singh. 15.Shyam Kishore Singh Son of Shivji Singh @ Shiv Pujan Singh. All residents of village-Kouli, P.S.-Gauri Chak, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. State Of Bihar

2. Ramchandra Kewat Son of Late Triloki Kewat, resident of VillageAbdullah Chak, P.S.-Gaurichak, District-Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binay Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Petitioners have challenged the order of cognizance dated 09.11.2015 whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for offences under Sections 147,323,341,379,504,506 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Gaurichak P.S.Case No.155 of 2014.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.605 of 2018 dt.15-10-2019 2/2

3. The FIR apparently discloses commission of cognizable offence. The probable defence and lacuna in the prosecution case in delayed lodging of the FIR etc cannot be considered at this stage. Hence, in my view, this application has got no merit. Accordingly, it stands dismissed.

4. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to raise their grievance at the stage of hearing on the charge, if the charge has not been framed as yet.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 16.10.2019 Transmission Date 16.10.2019