Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15112/2013dismissed

Parmeshwar Lal Das v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-02-28Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15112 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -50 Year- 2009 Thana -ASHOK PAPER MILL District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Parmeshwar Lal Das S/O Late Bhup Narain Das Resident Of Village And P.O.- Kahua, P.S.- Biroul, District- Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Md. Sadul Hassan Khan S/O Late Wasiul Hassan Khan Resident Of Village And P.O.- Motipur Via Rosera, District- Samastipur, At Present Working As Block Development Officer, Hayaghat, Darbhanga .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kauleshwar Chaudhary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Matloob Rab, A.P.P. ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-02-2017 Heard.

2. This application, filed on behalf of the petitioners, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is directed against the order dated 28.01.2013 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, in Cr.Revision No.350 of 2012 by which he, dismissing the Cr.Revision, has affirmed the order dated 04.06.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga, whereunder he took cognizance for the offence under Sections 385 and 166 against the petitioner, on perusal of the case diary and materials available on the record.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.15112 of 2013 (6) dt.28-02-2017 2/2

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. offence under Sections 385 and 166 of the I.P.C. is not made out but the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate illegally took cognizance of the offence under Sections 385 and 166 of the I.P.C. against the petitioner.

4. On going through the impugned order, I find no illegality therein amounting to abuse of the process of the court for interference with the same in an extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of this Court.

5. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise his grievance, as raised herein, in the trial court at the appropriate stage. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) AnilKrSinha/- U