Satish Chandra Dwivedi & Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 29 November, 2017

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Satish Chandra Dwivedi & Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 29 November, 2017

Bench: Arun Kumar

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 Criminal Miscellaneous No.38995 of 2014
                      Arising Out of PS.Case No. -89 Year- 2013 Thana -KATEYA District- GOPALGANJ
                 ======================================================
                 1. Satish Chandra Dwivedi
                 2. Subhash Cdhandra Dwivedi Both S/o Brinda Prasad Dwivedi
                 3. Sarika Kumari
                 4. Tulika Kumari Both D/o Satish Chandra Dwivedi
                 5. Sunita Devi @ Sutina Devi D/o Subhash Chandra Dwivedi All Resident
                    of Village Banarha, P.S. Kateya, District Gopalganj.

                                                                                .... ....   Petitioners
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                             .... .... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioners    : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey
                 For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Shankar Das (Spl.Pp)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR
                 ORAL ORDER

5   29-11-2017

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Counsel for the State.

The petitioners seek quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the cognizance order dated 28.1.2014 passed in Kateya PS Case No. 89 of 2013 by the Special Court of SC & ST Act, thereby taking cognizance of the offence under Section 504/34 of the IPC and Section 3(I)(X)of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Castes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the criminal prosecution is malicious in nature, because of the land dispute between the parties this false allegation has been leveled. On the same day a case was also instituted by the petitioners side so there is case Patna High Court Cr.M isc. No.38995 of 2014 (5) dt.29-11-2017 2 and counter case between the parties.

Having considered the rival submissions the present case cannot be considered malicious in nature only because there is case and counter case between the parties. It is not the case that allegations do not disclose such offences.

So finding no ground for interference with the cognizance order the application stands dismissed.

(Arun Kumar, J.) Snkumar/-

 U          T

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court - Orders