Ram Jitendra Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.825 of 2014 ======================================================
1. Ram Jitendra Kumar S/o Arbind Kumar null
2. Krishna Jitendra S/o Arbind Kumar
3. Priyanka Kumari daughter of Arbind Kumar, Wife of Sri Sanjeev Kumar resident of village- Mugalpura, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Patna.
4. Arbind Kumar S/o Late Ram Adhin Kumar
5. Indu Devi Wife of Arbind Kumar
6. Siddhi Kumari Daughter of Arbind Kumar All resident of (except petitioner No.-3) village- Birpur, P.S.- Birpur, District- Begusarai .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Superintendent of Police Begusarai
3. The S.H.O. Mahila Police Station, Begusarai
4. Chanchal Kumari daughter of Sri Surendra Kumar resident of villageHarakpura, P.O.- Karey, Police Station- Gardhpura, District- Begusarai .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sravan Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, A.C. to SC-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
In this application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek quashing of the order issuing warrant of arrest dated 23rd June, 2014 and order of remand dated 7th July, 2014 passed in connection with Begusarai Mahila P.S.Case No. 30 of 2014 dated 1st June, 2014 registered under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.825 of 2014 (5) dt.30-03-2015 2/2 The impugned order has been passed in exercise of power conferred under section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In my view, the petitioners have equally efficacious statutory remedy against the impugned order under the Code of Criminal Procedure itself.
In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep/- U T