Dinesh Chandra Pandey & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Anr on 9 October, 2012

[Cites 3, Cited by 3]

Patna High Court - Orders

Dinesh Chandra Pandey & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Anr on 9 October, 2012

Bench: Mandhata Singh

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                     Criminal Miscellaneous No.10319 of 2008
                    ======================================================
                    1. Dinesh Chandra Pandey
                    2. Rakesh Kumar Pandey
                    3. Lokesh Kumar Pandey
                                                                       .... .... Petitioners
                                                      Versus
                    1. The State Of Bihar
                    2. Ram Niwas Paswan
                    3. Krishna Pandey                             .... .... Opposite Parties
                    ======================================================
                    Appearance:
                    For the Petitioners    :   Mr. Dineshwar Mishra, Advocate
                                               Mr. Surendra Mishra, Advocate

                    For the Opposite Parties:   Mr.Ram Suresh Roy, Sr. Advocate
                                                Mr. Sanjay Kr. Jha
                                                Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy
                    For the State:              Mr. Matloob Rab, APP

                    ======================================================
                    CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH
                    ORAL ORDER

6.   09-10-2012

This is an application for quashing the order dated 5.9.2007 passed by Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul at Motihari in Ramgarhwa P. S. Case No. 49 of 2007 whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offence under section 431 of the Indian Penal Code.

Cognizance is taken for the offence under section 431 of the Indian Penal Code. F.I.R. is lodged by one Ram Niwas Paswan, Chaukidar of the area specifically deputed to take care of the passage that same was not being obstructed by accused petitioners. Finding obstruction the matter is informed to the Police for the F.I.R.

Some of the facts are admitted to the parties that petitioners and opposite party no.3 are descendants from the common ancestor. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10319 of 2008 (6) dt.09-10-2012 2 There was some partition in between them. A proceeding under section 147 of Code of Criminal Procedure decided between them giving right to opposite party no.3 to use the disputed land for his passage. Obstruction is raised over that land.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that obstructions if there was any over the land under section 147 of Code of Criminal Procedure proceeding, the Officer or the Court promulgated the order, was the competent person to file the complaint for the offence under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code.

Offence under section 431 of the Indian Penal Code comes in picture only when mischief concerns to public road, in my view, also section 431 of the Indian Penal Code is not applicable in the case as right has not been claimed under section 147 of Code of Criminal Procedure proceeding over the public land.

In the discussed facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 5.9.2007 passed in Ramgarhwa P. S. Case No. 49 of 2007 is hereby quashed.

(Mandhata Singh, J) A.I./N.A.F.R.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court - Orders