Patna High Court
Amit Kumar @ Amit Chaudhary vs The State Of Bihar on 30 January, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1395 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2008 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Begusarai
======================================================
Amit Kumar @ Amit Chaudhary Son Of Ram Preet Chaudhary Resident Of
Village - Masudanpur, P.O.- Masudanpur, P .S. Balia, District- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ravina Devi Wife Of Pawan Chaudhary Resident Of Village - Masudanpur,
P.O.- Masudanpur, P .S. Balia, District- Begusarai.
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
With
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 55946 Of 2023
Arising Out Of Ps. Case No.-445 Year-2008 Thana- Begusarai Complaint Case District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Ram Preet Chaudhary S/O Late Jai Mangal Chaudhary R/O Village-
Masudanpur, P.O. Masudanpur, Ps. Balia, Dist. Begusarai
2. Pappu Chaudhary @ Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary S/O Ram Preet Chaudhary
R/O Village- Masudanpur, P.O. Masudanpur, Ps. Balia, Dist. Begusarai
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ravina Devi W/O Pawan Chaudhary R/O Village- Masudanpur, P.O.
Masudanpur, Ps. Balia, Dist. Begusarai
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1395 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
Mr.Mohammad Farooq, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 55946 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-01-2025
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present quashing petition has been filed to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1395 of 2024 dt.30-01-2025
2/5
quash to order dated 07.09.2009 passed by learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Complaint
Case No. 445C/2008, whereby and whereunder learned
Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under
Sections 323, 342 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code and
issued process against the accused persons including this
petitioner.
3. In terms of the order dated 31.08.2023 (passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 55946 of 2023), this Court directed the
Superintendent of Police, Begusarai to report as to whether
the husband of the complainant was in police custody on
08.03.2008
in connection with Baliya P.S. Case No. 42 of
2008 or not.
4. In furtherance of aforesaid direction of this
Court, Ms. Nisheet Priya, Deputy Superintendent of Police
(Headquarter), Begusarai has furnished a counter affidavit
dated 14.12.2023 before this Court, where it is clearly
averred in paragraph ‘9’ as “That in the aforesaid
background, it is apparent that on 8 th March 2008, the
husband of the complainant, namely, Pawan
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1395 of 2024 dt.30-01-2025
3/5
Choudhary was in police custody.”
5. At this stage, it would be apposite to reproduce
para 102 of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court as
available through State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal reported
in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, which reads as under:
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various
relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the
principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of
decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power
under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482
of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above,
we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration
wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent
abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the
ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out
a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information
report and other materials, if any, accompanying the
FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)
of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate
within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1395 of 2024 dt.30-01-2025
4/5FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support
of the same do not disclose the commission of any
offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute
a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-
cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a
police officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on
the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a
just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in
any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act
(under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to
the institution and continuance of the proceedings
and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code
or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for
the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding
is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view
to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
6. Considering the counter affidavit, as aforesaid,
the present case appears impossible on its face and suggest
nothing but a false litigation which appears covered under
guideline No. 1 & 7 of Bhajan Lal‘s case (supra).
7. Accordingly, impugned order dated 07.09.2009
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1395 of 2024 dt.30-01-2025
5/5
as passed by learned Judicial Magistrate – 1st Class,
Begusarai in connection with Complaint Case No. 445C/2008
qua petitioner(s) stands quashed/set-aside.
8. This application stands allowed.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned
trial court/concerned court forthwith.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 31.01.2025 Transmission Date 31.01.2025