Savita Devi @ Chhathi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52115 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-390 Year-2010 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Savita Devi @ Chhathi Devi Wife of Om Prakash Mahto @ Om Prakash Kushwaha Resident of village- Rampur (Bagaha), Police Station- Bagaha, District- West Champaran.

2.

Om Prakash Mahto @ Om Prakash Kushwaha Son of Jagdish Mahto Resident of village- Rampur (Bagaha), Police Station- Bagaha, DistrictWest Champaran. 3.

Nirjala Devi Wife of Sudama Mahto Resident of village- Telpur, Police Station- Lauriya, District- West Champaran.

4.

Amla Devi Wife of Shankar Mahto Resident of village- Telpur, Police Station- Lauriya, District- West Champaran.

5.

Krishna Mahto @ Krishna Kumar Son of Shankar Mahto Resident of village- Telpur, Police Station- Lauriya, District- West Champaran. 6.

Pukar Mahto Son of Shankar Mahto Resident of village- Telpur, Police Station- Lauriya, District- West Champaran.

7.

Sudama Mahto Son of Shankar Mahto Resident of village- Telpur, Police Station- Lauriya, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Laxami Prasad Son of Late Gopal Prasad Resident of village- Amwa Majhar, Police Station- Bettiah (Mufassil), District- West Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-09-2025 Heard Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the State.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners informs that in view of the fact he has been instructed that the victim, who is the daughter of the informant,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52115 of 2025(2) dt.16-09-2025 2/2 has already married with some other person and as such, proceeding pending before the learned District Court is vexatious in nature and the same is required to be quashed.

3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State informs that the petitioners have not challenged the order, which has been taken as per prosecution under Section 319 of the CrPC. and they sought for quashing of order dated 05.06.2025 by which the petitioners' application for discharge has been rejected.

4. In view of the changed circumstances and stage of trial I am not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge IInd, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Sessions Case No.227 of 2012(C.I.S. No.1971 of 2013) arising out of Complaint Case No.390 of 2010.

5. The petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U T