Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Om Prakash Singh @ Om Prakash Sinha vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 22 April, 2014

Author: Rakesh Kumar

Bench: Rakesh Kumar

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  Criminal Miscellaneous No.38279 of 2011
                 ======================================================
                 Om Prakash Singh @ Om Prakash Sinha , son of Late Shri Ram Ran
                 Vijay Prasad Sinha, a resident of village - Bhawani Tola, P.S. : Maner,
                 Distt: Patna
                                                                          .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 1. The State of Bihar
                 2. Shri Ram Niwas Rai, s/o Late Musafir Rai
                 3. Lakhan Rai, s/o Late Daroga Rai
                 4. Janak Rai, s/o late Randeo Rai
                 5. Jay Narain Rai, s/o late Kripal Rai
                 6. Motilala Rai, s/o Ram Iswar Rai
                 7. Punit Rai, s/o Late Buta Rai
                 8. Ram Iqbal Rai, s/o Late Jaipal Rai
                 9. Birju Rai, s/o Late Jaipal Rai
                 Opp. Parties 2 to 9 all residents of village and post: Patila, P.S. Maner,
                 Distt: Patna
                 10. Ram Dayal Rai, s/o Mukhdeo Rai
                 11. Radheshyam Rai, s/o late Kariman Rai
                 12. Mahendra Rai, s/o late Ramjit Rai
                 Opp. Parties from 10 to 12 all resident of village : Bhawani Tola,
                 P.S.: Maner, Dist. : Patna.
                                                                     .... .... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :
                 For the Opposite Party/s    :
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
                 ORAL ORDER

8   22-04-2014

Heard Sri Aditya Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned A.P.P. as well as Sri Ambika Bhagat, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2 to 12.

The petitioner, who is complainant in Complaint Case No. 669(C) of 2005, has approached this court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash an order dated 21.6.2011 Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38279 of 2011 (8) dt.22-04-2014 2/3 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Patna, in Cr. Revision No. 144 of 2011. By the said order learned revisional court has rejected the revision filed by the petitioner against the order dated 20.1.2011 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, in Complaint Case No. 669(C) of 2005. By order dated 20.1.2011, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate has rejected the petition filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner for getting a document i.e. Ladavi Deed No. 2317 of 1915, which was produced for getting the same marked as an exhibit. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that witnesses have already stated in respect of contents disclosed in the said Ladavi, however, due to bona fide mistake, said document could not be got exhibited. He submits that for getting the said document exhibited a petition was filed , which has been rejected by the learned Magistrate and said order has been affirmed by the Revisional Court. He submits that, for the ends of justice, while exercising power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this court may direct the court below to mark the document i.e. said Ladavi as an exhibit, since contents of the document has already been disclosed by the witnesses during the evidence.

Sri Ambika Bhagat, learned counsel for the private Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.38279 of 2011 (8) dt.22-04-2014 3/3 opposite parties, has argued that it appears that such petition was filed only with a view to delay the conclusion of the trial and the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the same, which has been affirmed by the Revisional Court.

After hearing the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, this court is of the opinion that since in respect of contents of the document, the witnesses have already deposed before the court below, only by way of getting the said Ladavi exhibited, no prejudice will be caused to either of the parties. Accordingly, for the ends of justice, it is desirable to direct the learned Magistrate to consider the prayer of the petitioner in respect of getting the said Ladavi marked as an exhibit.

With above observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/-