Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14895/2014dismissed

Dr. Randhir Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2016-08-02Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14895 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2414 Year- 2012 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Dr. Randhir Kumar Sharma Son Of Ram Das Thakur Resident Of Village - Hanuman Nagar, P.S.- Patrakar Nagar, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Dr. Lakhindra Prasad, Appropriate Authority - cum- Civil Surgeon Patna Judges Court Road, P.S. Pirbahore District Patna , s/o Late Jagdish Paswan , r/o Bishunpura , Gidha, P.S. Maniari, District Muzaffarpur .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-08-2016 Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Sinha No. 2 , learned counsel who was assisted by Sri Arvind Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner , Sri Madan Kumar, learned A.P.P. as well as Sri Anil Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the complainantAppropriate Authority- cum- Civil Surgeon /opposite party -2. The sole petitioner has approached this court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash an order dated 11.2.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge , Patna whereby he has rejected the revision i.e. Cr. Revision No. 3823 of 2014, which was preferred against the order dated 31.1.2014, passed by learned Sub

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14895 of 2014 (3) dt.02-08-2016 2/2 Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 2414(C ) of 2012 rejecting the petition for discharge under section 245 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the court that without any material the petitioner has been made accused whereas fact remains that order of rejection of discharge petition has already been approved by the revisional court and the present case filed in the garb of section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has virtually been filed as second revision which is barred under section 397 (3) of the Cr.P.C.

The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T