Patna High Court
Krishna Deo Mishra vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 25 November, 2010
Author: Rakesh Kumar
Bench: Rakesh Kumar
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34573 OF 2007
In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure
-----------
KRISHNA DEO MISHRA, Son of Late Akshya Lal Mishra, resident
of village- Sirnia, Police Station-Gogri, District-Khagaria-- Petitioner
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. The Superintendent of Police, Khagaria
3. The Dy.Supdt. of Police, Gogri, Khagaria since 8.11.1991 till
31.5.1994
4. Sub Inspector of Police, Sri R.N.Thakur, I.O. of the instant case cum- Officer Incharge of Gogri P.S. District-Khagaria( 1991-92)
5. Sub Inspector of Police, Sri Naveen Prasad, I.O. of the instant case- cum- Officer Incharge of Gogri P.S. District-Khagaria ( 1992-94)
6. Sub-Inspector of Police, Sri T.Sukla, I.O. of the instant case, P.S. Gogri, District-Khagaria ( 1994) --- Opp.Parties.
----------------
PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J. Today again on call, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. However, Sri Binoda Nand Mishra, learned counsel who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of Gauri Devi (complainant) is present. Yesterday also, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. However, the case was adjourned for the day with an indication that no further adjournment shall be granted.
2. I have also heard learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.
3. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 16.4.2007 passed by learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-1st , Khagaria in G.R. Case No.1429 of 1991, arising out of Gogri P.S. Case No. 232 of 1991, Sessions Trial No. 457 of 2006. By the said order, the learned Addl.Sessions 2 Judge has rejected the petition filed under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was filed for discharge of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner had taken the stand that he was the informant in the case and, as such, he was not required be made an accused at subsequent stage.
After going through the impugned order, it appears that the learned trial Judge after examining number of paragraphs of the case diary and thereafter by assigning a detailed reason has rejected the petition for discharge. After going through the materials, the Court is satisfied that there is no ground for interference with the impugned order.
Accordingly, the petition stands rejected.
In view of rejection of the present petition, interim order of stay stands automatically vacated.
Keeping in view the fact that in the case, occurrence had taken place in the year 1991 and the matter remained pending at the stage of charge for a long period, it is desirable to direct the court below to take effective steps so that the case may come to its logical end without any further delay.
With above observation and direction, the petition stands rejected.
( Rakesh Kumar, J.) Patna High Court,Patna Dated: the 25th November,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/N.A.F.R.