Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25694 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -218 Year- 2013 Thana -NAYA RAM NAGAR DistrictMUNGER ======================================================== Sanjay Yadav S/o Rajendra Yadav resident of village- Khoja Bazar, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, District- Munger .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Bajrangi Yadav, son of Saryug Yadav, R/o - Khoja Bazar, P.S. - Nayagaon, P.S. - Kasim Bazar, District - Munger. .... .... Opposite Party ======================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate For the O. P. No. 2 :

Mr. S.M. Sabbir Alam, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anil Kr. Singh No.1, APP ======================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking quashing of the order dated 17.02.2014, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger in Nayaram nagar P.S. Case No. 218/2013, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 341, 323, 325 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and issued summon for his appearance.

In the First Information Report, as

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25694 of 2014 dt.04-08-2017 contained in Annexure- 1 to the present application, there are allegations of assault against the accused persons causing grievous injury on the head of the informant. Earlier, the brother of this petitioner had moved this court for quashing of the order taking cognizance against him in Cr. Misc. No. 25216/2014 which was dismissed by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.07.2014. So far as the present petitioner is concerned, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and issued summon against him after filing of supplementary charge-sheet.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence on record for taking cognizance of an offence under Section 307 I.P.C., still learned Magistrate has passed order taking cognizance under the said provision.

Be that as it may, this Court will not go into the merit of the allegations at this stage as the learned Judicial Magistrate has already found a prima facie case against the petitioner. So far as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner will have an opportunity to address the court at the time of framing of charge where the learned Court will consider the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25694 of 2014 dt.04-08-2017 materials available on record for purposes of framing of charge under a particular provision of the Indian Penal Code.

With the aforesaid observation, this application stands dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) Rajeev/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date Transmission Date