Jharkhand High Court
Belal Mansuri vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr on 1 December, 2014
Author: P.P. Bhatt
Bench: P.P. Bhatt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 2632 of 2014
Belal Mansuri @ Md. Bilal Mansuri ....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties
--------
Coram: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Awanikant Prasad, APP
/01.12.2014: Present criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the order dated 25.09.2014, passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Singhbhum East at Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 250 of 2014, arising out of Mango P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 (G.R. Case No. 691 of 2014) for the offences punishable under Sections 341/ 323/ 379/ 307/ 302/ 504/ 147/ 149 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby and whereunder, the prayer of the petitioner for joint trial of Mango P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 (G.R. Case No. 691 of 2014) pending in the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Singhbhum East at Jamshedpur and Mango P.S. Case No. 112 of 2014 (G.R. Case No. 692 of 2014) pending in the Court of learned SDJM, Singhbhum East at Jamshedpur was dismissed. It is further prayed that necessary direction may be issued upon the opposite party No.2 to complete the investigation and file charge sheet of Mango P.S. Case No. 112 of 2014 (G.R. Case No. 692 of 2014).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that cross cases were filed vide Annexure-1 & 4 and therefore, prayer was made before the learned court-below to have joint trial of the cases, but, the learned court- below, without proper appreciation of the facts and circumstances involved, rejected the prayer made by the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to and relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sudhir and others versus State of M.P., reported in (2001) 2 Supreme Court Cases 688 and State of M.P. versus Mishrilal (Dead) and others, reported in (2003) 9 Supreme Court Cases 426.
The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the informant of Mango P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 may be impleaded as opposite party No.3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to implead informant of Mango P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 as opposite party No.3.
Permission, as sought for, is hereby granted.
Necessary amendment be carried out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the cause-title of the petition, accordingly.
Upon such impleadment, notice be issued to the newly added opposite party No.3, on her present and correct address, under registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process, for which requisite etc. must be filed on or before 3rd of December, 2014.
Personal service of notice is also permitted. Affidavit regarding service of notice must be filed on or before 3rd of December, 2014.
Notice is made returnable by 16th December, 2014. Put up this case on 16th December, 2014.
Regard being had to the above submissions, by way of ad-interim order, further proceedings of in Sessions Trial No. 250 of 2014, arising out of Mango P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 (G.R. Case No. 691 of 2014), pending in the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Singhbhum East at Jamshedpur, shall remain stayed, till 16th December, 2014.
If the requisite etc. is not filed on or before 3rd of December, 2014, order with regard to stay, shall stand vacated without making further reference to this Court.
.
(P.P. Bhatt, J.) S.B.