Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24506/2013dismissed

Pawan Kumar @ Kamlesh Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-06-20Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24506 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2010 Thana -GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District- GAYA ====================================================== Pawan Kumar @ Kamlesh Kumar Pita- Sw. Jaynath Prasad, GramChaugaon, Post- Laund, Thana- Sirdalla, Zila- Nawada .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar Rajya

2. Jayram Singh Pita- Sw. Bisheshwar Singh, Niwasi Muhalla- Ramna Sahar, Gaya, Dakghar- Mukhya Dakghar Gaya, Thana- Civil Lines, ZilaGaya .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indradeo Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-06-2016 Heard Sri Indradeo Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Uday Pratap, learned A.P.P. The sole petitioner, invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 4.12.2010 passed in Complaint Case No. 136 of 2010 by which the learned Magistrate after conducting enquiry has passed the order of cognizance. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the court that in a civil dispute colour of criminal offence was given and as such, relying on judgments reported in 2013 (1) BLJ SC - 204 (Paramjeet Batra versus State of Uttarakhand & Ors. ), 2007 (3) BLJ PHC - 333 (Vijay Kumar versus State of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24506 of 2013 (5) dt.20-06-2016 2/2 & Another) submits that order of cognizance is liable to be set aside.

Besides hearing, I have also perused the material available on record particularly the compliant case. In the complaint petition there are two types of accusation. First part of the accusation relates mainly against one accused no. 1 Smt. Neelam Devi, who is not before this court. Second part of accusation is regarding assault against the petitioner and two others. On perusal of the impugned order, the court is satisfied that no illegality has been committed by the court below. The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T