Patna High CourtCR. MISC./63854/2023dismissed

Md. Saine @ Sine v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-01Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63854 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2020 Thana- LODIPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Md. Saine @ Sine Son Of Md. Samad Village- Lodipur, Ps- Lodipur, DistBhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Dilip Mahaldar Son Of Kailash Mahaldar Village- Ajhokupa, Ps- Rupauli, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the Opposite Party no. 2.

2. The following order was passed by this Court on 11.12.2023, which reads as under:

" 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2, both under registered cover with A/D as well as ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed on or before 21.12.2023, failing which this application, as against opposite party no. 2, shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench.

3. Put up this case on 12.02.2024.

4. In the meantime, the operation of the order dated 27.07.2021 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial MagistrateIX, Bhagalpur in Lodipur P.S. Case No. 167 of 2020 whereby cognizance of the offences under Sections 341, 323, 504, 406 and 420 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63854 of 2023(6) dt.01-07-2024 2/3 Indian Penal Code has been taken, shall remain stayed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant alleges that he had purchased a Mahindra Pick-up Van bearing registration no. BR09GA3368FB1353 for an amount of Rs.4,35,000/-. On 03.07.2019, he gave Rs.1,70,000/- to the petitioner and rest of Rs.2,35,000/- on 02.08.2019 but the vehilce was not handed over to him till the date of instituting the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that no doubt what has been alleged is true but then on account of dispute between the petitioner and the informant the deal could not go through but the petitioner through NEFT returned an amount of Rs.2 lakhs to the informant as would be evident from Annexure-2 to the quashing application. It is next submitted that petitioner is ready to return the rest of the amount also."

3. On the last occasion, the petitioner had submitted that he is ready to return the rest of the amount. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is ready to return only 90,000/- as he has already paid Rs. 1,10,000/- in cash before some witnesses. This stand of the petitioner subsequent to the order dated 11.12.2023 does not entitle him to any relief from this Court. Once he had submitted before this Court that the petitioner is ready to return the balance amount now he cannot resile from the same.

4. Accordingly, this application is dismissed because the petitioner is resiling from his undertaking.

5. The Court below is directed to directed to proceed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63854 of 2023(6) dt.01-07-2024 3/3 and conclude the case within six months.

6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the District Judge, Bhagalpur, forthwith through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T