Patna High CourtCR. MISC./38298/2013disposed

Manikant Acharaya v. The State Of Bihar

2017-06-22Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.38008 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -152 Year- 1996 Thana -BIRAUL District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Manikant Acharaya Son of Ramjee Acharaya Resident of Village Afjala Balia, P.S. Biraul, District Darbhanga.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.38298 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -149 Year- 1996 Thana -BIRAUL District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Manikant Acharaya Son Of Ramjee Acharaya, Resident Of Village - Afjala Balia, P.S. - Biraul, District - Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Cr.Misc. No.38008 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Pathak For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramchandra Singh(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.38298 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Pathak For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Chandra Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-06-2017 This petition for quashing order dated 05.07.2013 is challenged, which is passed in Cr. Revision No.68 of 2013 by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga whereby prayer of the petitioner for setting aside the order of cognizance under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 114, 324, 332, 333, 337, 338, 224, 225 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code was refused.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the evidence collected during investigation shows that injuries are

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38008 of 2013 (4) dt.22-06-2017 2 / 2 simple in nature and no offence under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code is made out and wants to withdraw this quashing in order to raise the submission at the time of framing of charge. The petitioner may raise these points at the time of framing of charge. However, at this stage, there is no merit to interfere with the order dated 05.07.2013, passed in Cr. Revision No.68 of 2013 by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga. The quashing petition is disposed of.

(Arun Kumar, J.) S.Kumar/- U T