Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7067 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-517 Year-2015 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== MANISH KUMAR SON OF ASHOK PANDIT RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMAHUA, PS AND DIST- SUPAUL ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

VIDYANAND THAKUR SON OF LATE LAKHAN KUMAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAHUA, PS AND DIST- SUPAUL ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 10-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the order dated 17.10.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 517 of 2015, where cognizance was taken for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.

3. During the course of argument, it transpires that victim recovered during investigation and thereafter his statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., wherein victim made incriminating statement against petitioner and other co-accused persons that they forcibly taken him for Saharsa Railway Station, from where he was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7067 of 2024 dt.10-07-2025 2/2 further brought to Patna and thereafter he was sent to Haryana by train.

4. In view of aforesaid, at least at this stage, it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against petitioner as to doubt the cognizance order dated 17.10.2023 as passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 517 of 2015, therefore, same does not require any interference by this Court.

5. Hence, the present quashing petition stands dismissed being devoid of any merit.

6. At this stage, it is pointed out that petitioner was juvenile on the alleged date of occurrence, if it is so petitioner is at liberty to raise all such issues before the concerned Court, in accordance with law.

7. Office is directed to sent a copy of this judgment to the learned Trial Court, forthwith. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) S.Tripathi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 11.07.2025 Transmission Date 11.07.2025