Patna High CourtC. REV./181/2016dismissed

Binod Shankar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-07-20Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.181 of 2016 =========================================================== Binod Shankar Prasad son of Late Sri Bhola Sah, resident of village- Katra Bazar, P.S.-Chapra, District- Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Co-operative Societies, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur

5. The Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur

6. The Station House Officer, Ahiyapur Police Station, Muzaffarpur

7. P. Jyoti & Companyd, Chartered Accountant, Bhola Takies Samastipur- 848101

8. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Muzaffarpur

9. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dayan Shanker Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-07-2016 By way of the present application preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 and Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, the petitioner seeks review of the order dated 25.1.2016 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.297 of 2015 whereby the prayer for quashing of the first information report in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No.438 of 2005 has been rejected by this Court.

2. The Registry is right in pointing out that a review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Civil

Patna High Court C. REV. No.181 of 2016 dt.20-07-2016 2/2 Procedure Code or Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable against the order passed in criminal writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the application, being not maintainable in law, is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 21.7.2016 Transmission Date 21.7.2016