Amar Singh And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.50668 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -95 Year- 2012 Thana -KUCHAIKOTE District- GOPALGANJ ======================================================
1. Amar Singh
2. Raju Kumar Singh @ Raju Singh
3. Sanjeev Kumar Singh @ Sanjeev Singh
4. Mahatam Singh @ Mahatam Kumar Singh All Sons of Rabindra Singh Resident of village - Paharpur, Chhangur, P.S. Kuchaikot, District - Gopalganj .... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Puskal Kumar Singh S/o Pramod Singh Resident of village - Paharpur, Chhangur, P.S. Kuchaikot, District - Gopalganj .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 2.
24-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.11.2014 passed by the learned A.D.J.-III, Gopalganj in Session Trial No. 193/2014 arising out of Kuchaikot P.S. Case No. 95/2012 under Sections 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by which the learned court below has been pleased to reject the petition dated 18.10.2014 filed by accused petitioners.
Perused the impugned order, it appears that in course of investigation sufficient materials were collected
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50668 of 2014 (2) dt.24-11-2017 against the petitioners which have been noticed by the learned court below though Police had submitted a final form. Name of the petitioners seems to have transpired for the offences alleged under Section 436/34 of the Indian Penal Code and cognizance was taken vide order dated 05.02.2013. The learned court below has found sufficient materials for the purpose of framing of charge. Thus, I find no illegality or infirmity with the impugned order.
This application has no merit, it is, accordingly, dismissed.
Rajeev/- (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) U T