← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41767/2022dismissed

Paul Masih @ Father Paul Masih v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-04Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41767 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1101 Year-2021 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- East Champaran ====================================================== PAUL MASIH @ FATHER PAUL MASIH S/O CHARAN MASIH Resident of Chhota Bariyarpur, Presently residing at St. Conrads College, Sikandara District- Agra (U.P) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

ANAND PRAKASH S/O GIRIJA NANDAN Resident of Village- Mathiya Deeh Chhatauni, P.S.- Chhatauni, District- East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shekhar Harshvardhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

This application has been filed for quashing of order dated 11.04.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Motihari at East Champaran in Complaint Case No. 1101 of 2021 by which learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 295A, 323, 379, 504, 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the complaint, complainant was appointed as a computer teacher at St. Mary's School, Bada Bariyarpur, East Champaran at Motihari. It is alleged that petitioner is the Principal of St. Francis School who is also Manager of St. Mary's School put pressure on the complainant to accept

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41767 of 2022(3) dt.04-07-2023 2/2 Christianity. When the complainant denied to accept the same, he threatened him and also not to pay the dues of complainant's salary of one year i.e. Rs.96,000/-.

There is serious allegations levelled against the petitioner which cannot be decided at the stage of cognizance by affidavit evidence. Hence, this application is dismissed. The petitioner is given liberty to raise all his grievances at the stage of framing of charge.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Harsh/ U T