Ali Hussain And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4594 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2014 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad ======================================================
1. Ali Hussain
2. Nezamuddin @ Nezamuddin Ansari
3. Hafiz @ Md. Hafiz Ansari all the three sons of late Kabedin Ansari resident of Mohalla Azadnagar, Tikri Road, PS-Aurangabad, Distt-Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Smt. Zahida Khatoon wife of Sri Nezamuddin resident of Village-Serajpur PS Nabinagar, Distt-Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sushil Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 16-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP.
This matter relates to a prayer purported to be under Section 239/240 CrPC.
There happens to be submission at the end of the petitioners that petitioners no.1 and 3 were not sent up for trial while petitioner no.2, as is evident from the order impugned as disclosed, by the petitioner no.2, had divorced the informant on 26.03.2014. The informant had admitted the factum of divorce but, exact date is under mark of question.
In the aforesaid background, the order impugned is fit to be set aside by way of allowing the discharge of the petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4594 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2019 2/2 Learned APP opposed the prayer.
It happens to be a case amongst the spouses. Be that as it may, from the order impugned, it is evident that after going through the case diary, learned lower court has found a prima facie case subsisting against the petitioners whereupon, the prayer has been rejected. It is needless to say, as observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander as reported in (2012)9 SCC 460, that at the time of framing of charge, the materials to be appreciated happens to be weaker than the prima facie case.
That being so, the order impugned needs no interference. Accordingly, instant petition is rejected. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) perwez U T