Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate. Mr v. S. Sahay, A.P.P
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 2388 of 2012 Saukat Ali ..... Petitioner(s) The State of Jharkhand & Anr. …. Opp. Party(s) Versus CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) For the State : : -----
Legal Reasoning
Mr. P. P. N. Roy, Sr. Advocate. Mr. V. S. Sahay, A.P.P. 02 /22.04.2013. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application so as to raise all the points which have been been raised in this application at an appropriate stage. Reserving the aforesaid liberty, this application is permitted to be withdrawn. Sandeep/ (R. R. Prasad, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No.2320 of 2012 Satyadeo Tiwari ..... Petitioner(s) 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Sushma Devi Versus …. Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) For the State : : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate. Mr. Anand Kr. Pandey, A.P.P. ----- 02 /22.04.2013. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the opposite party No.2 had lodged the case for commission of the offence under Sections 498A, 379, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the husband and other persons including the petitioner who never happened to be the family member of the husband of the opposite party No.2 and that after institution of the case, there appears to be settlement in between the husband and the wife as presently both of them are residing together and, therefore, it can be said that the opposite party No.2 has compromised the case. In view of the submission, let notice be issued to the opposite party No.2 for which, requisites etc., under Registered Cover AD must be filed by Friday i.e. 26.04.2013. On appearance of the opposite party No.2, list this case under the heading “For Admission”. Sandeep/ (R. R. Prasad, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 2156 of 2012 1.Om Prakash Singh 2.Ashwini Kumar Mahato 3. Akhileshwar Kumar 4.Ramesh Mahto 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Baleshwar Singh Versus ..... Petitioner(s) …. Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) For the State : : Mr. K. S. Nanda, Advocate. Md. Hatim, A.P.P. ----- 05 /22.04.2013. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that earlier a complaint was filed against these petitioners and some other accused persons putting certain allegations as against them. That complaint was sent under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. before the concerned Police Station for its institution and registration. That was investigated upon and the charge-sheet was submitted. Meanwhile, another F.I.R. was lodged against these petitioners and some more persons who were not accused in earlier case on the allegation which were the same as in the first case and thereby, any prosecution in second case would be illegal, in view of the decision rendered in a case of Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat and others, reported in [(2010) 12 SCC 254] and T. T. Antony vs. State of Kerala, reported in [(2001) 6 SCC 181]. In view of the submission, let notice be issued to the opposite party No.2 to show cause as to why this application be not admitted and /or if possible, be disposed of, at the stage of admission itself, for which requisites etc., under Registered Cover AD must be filed by Friday, 26.04.2013. On appearance of the opposite party No.2, list this case under the heading “For Admission”. (R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 2221 of 2012 1.Dharmendra Kumar Sharma 2.Suresh Prasad Gupta 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Sanjiv Kumar Ravi Versus ..... Petitioner(s) …. Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) For the State : : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate. Mr. Vijay Kumar Gupta, A.P.P. ----- 02 / 22.04.2013 . Issue notice to the opposite party No.2 to show cause as to why
Decision
this application be not admitted and /or if possible, be disposed of, at the stage of admission itself, for which requisites etc., under Registered Cover AD must be filed by Friday, 26.04.2013. On appearance of the opposite party No.2, list this case under the heading “For Admission”. Until further order, no coercive action shall be taken against the present two petitioners in connection with Nagar [Giridih] P.S. Case No.209 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No.2143 of 2012, presently pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Giridih or its successor court. Sandeep/ (R. R. Prasad, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 2251 of 2012 Ashok Kumar Prasad ..... Petitioner(s) The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party(s) Versus CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) For the State : : Mr. K. P. Deo, Advocate. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, A.P.P. ----- 02 /22.04.2013 . On the day of judgment, an application was filed under Section 317 of the Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner taking a plea that he has been suffering from sun stroke. That petition was rejected and the warrant of arrest [non-bailable] was ordered to be issued on 12.06.2012 against the petitioner in connection with Bokaro Thermal P.S. Case No.18 of 2005 [G.R. No.290 of 2005]. That order was challenged before the revisional court and the revisional court vide its order dated 13.09.2012 affirmed the order passed by the trial court and dismissed the revision application. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it does appear that on the day of judgment, an application was filed under Section 317 of the Cr.P.C. taking a plea that he has been suffering from sun stroke which was rejected, but no reason has been assigned. However, taking into account the provision as contained in Section 317(2) of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner should have been given at least one opportunity to appear, but no such opportunity was given and thereby, the orders passed by the courts below suffer from illegality. Accordingly, the order passed on 12.06.2012 is hereby, set aside. In the result, this application stands allowed. The petitioner is directed to appear before the court below on 30.04.2013. Let this order be communicated through “FAX” at the cost of the petitioner. Sandeep/ (R. R. Prasad, J.)