Parash Nath And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68275 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2017 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

Parash Nath Son of Late Muni Lal, 2.

Amar Nath, Son of Late Muni Lal 3.

Baiju Nath, Son of Late Muni Lal, 4.

Basuki Nath, Son of Late Muni Lal, 5.

Sanju @ Sarju Prasad @ Sarju Tamrakar, Son of Late Muni Lal, 6.

Chhotu Kumar, Son of Prakash Nath.

7.

Sanjay Kumar, Son of Prakash Nath.

8.

Deepak Kumar, Son of Prakash Nath.

9.

Manoj Kumar, Son of Prakash Nath.

10.

Kurun Kumar @ Kuru, Son of Prakash Nath.

11.

Gopal Kumar, Son of Amar Nath, 12.

Biru Kumar, Son of Amar Nath, 13.

Sonu Kumar, Son of Baiju Nath, 14.

Lakhan Kumar, Son of Sanju Prasad @ Sarju Tamrakar. 15.

Bharat Kumar, Son of Sanju Prasad @ Sarju Tamrakar. 16.

Ramjee Kumar, Son of Sanju Prasad @ Sarju Tamrakar. 17.

Suresh Thathera @ Suresh Pd. Son of Late Ramprit Ram, All are Resident of Village- Tehta Bazar, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State Of Bihar 2.

Kiran Devi, S/o Late Sanju Sao, Resident of Village- Durga Ashthan Tehta Bazar, P.S.- Tehta, District- Jahanabad.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh -5, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present petition has been filed under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68275 of 2018(2) dt.07-04-2026 2/2 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 20.12.2017 passed by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in Tehta (Makhdumpur) P.S. Case No. 96 of 2017, Tr. No. 1727 of 2018 by which cognizance was taken against the petitioners under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 504 of the I.P.C.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this case may be disposed of with liberty to take all the points raised in the petition before the Trial Court at the appropriate stage.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has no objection to this prayer of the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, the present case is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners, as prayed for.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) rakhi/- U T