Shabnam Praveen v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83113 of 2019 In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3171 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-488 Year-2019 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

SHABNAM PRAVEEN Wife of Md Taffazul Hussain @ Taffazul Hussain Resident of Flat No. 302, G.S.R Apartment, Ranipur Road, Alwa Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, Distt - Patna.

2.

Md. Taquir Hussain @ Tauquir @ Sarique Son of Md. Taffazul Hussain @ Taffazul Hussain Resident of Flat No. 302, G.S.R Apartment, Ranipur Road, Alwa Colony, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, Distt - Patna. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Annu Kumari Wife of Ranjit Rajak Resident of Ananad Puri, Khagaul, P.S.- Khagaul, Distt - Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Atul Kumar Mehta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 07-01-2020 Taking a different set of lawyer now the petitioners have moved this Court seeking modification of the order dated 29.11.2019 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3179 of 2019. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he is a new entrant at the Bar and for that reason he could not take care of what has been pointed out by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rotary Club, Begusarai etc. V. State of Bihar and others reported in AIR 2001 Patna 115 and prior to filing of this case he had neither got information from the earlier set of lawyer as to the circumstances under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83113 of 2019(2) dt.07-01-2020 2/2 which the earlier set of lawyer had made statement in this Court and on whose instruction the earlier set of lawyer had made such a statement to pay the amount which were deposited in the account of the husband of the appellant no. 1 of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3179 of 2019.

In the opinion of this Court, if the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners is entertained at this stage, it would amount to entertaining a review application which is not permissible. Nothing has been shown in the nature of a typographical or clerical mistake in the order. This application has no merit. It is dismissed accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U