Patna High Court
PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH @ PRADEEP KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 22.02.2021 and allowed the petitioner to file a discharge application in the lower court.
Summary
The petitioner Pradeep Kumar Singh filed an amendment to his quashing application seeking to set aside an order dated 22 February 2021 passed by the Sessions Judge, Supaul. The High Court allowed the amendment, directing that the impugned order be set aside and granting the petitioner liberty to file a discharge application in the lower court. The Court noted that the petitioner was unable to file the discharge application earlier because the amendment application was pending. It emphasized that the petitioner should now file the discharge application so that the lower court can consider all material and pass a reasoned order, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Kanchan Kumar v. State of Bihar. Consequently, the order of the Sessions Judge was vacated, and the petitioner was instructed to proceed with the discharge application.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a petitioner is unable to file a discharge application due to pending proceedings in a higher court?
- Whether the High Court can set aside the Sessions Judge’s order and grant liberty to file a discharge application.
Subjects
- quashing application
- discharge application
- criminal procedure
- amendment
- High Court order
- Sessions Judge
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34183 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2020 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul
======================================================
PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH @ PRADEEP KUMAR S/O CHANDESHWAR
SINGH Resident of- Ward No. 4 Sadanandpur, P.S.- Bhaptiahi, District-
Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur
Mr. Vaishnavi Singh
Mr. Shivam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.G.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 02-02-2026 Re:- I.A. No. 1 of 2023.
This application has been filed for amendment in the
paragraph 1 of the quashing application.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the interlocutory
application, the same is allowed and now the prayer portion of
the quashing application will read as under:-
“This application has been filed on behalf
of the petitioner for quashing the order dated
15.12.2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Supaul in Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 48 of
2020 (S.T. No. 25 of 2021) as well as for quashing the
order dated 22.02.2021 passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Supaul.”
Re:- Cr. Misc. No. 34183 of 2021.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34183 of 2021(4) dt.02-02-2026
2/2
3. Heard the parties.
4. During pendency of this case, charges have been
framed against the petitioner by the learned Sessions Judge,
Supaul and learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner could not get a chance to file a discharge application
in the Court below as the present application was pending in this
Court.
5. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view
that the petitioner ought to have filed a discharge application so
that the entire materials could have been considered by the
Court below.
6. In view of the above, this application is allowed
and accordingly, the impugned order dated 22.2.2021 is hereby
set aside with liberty to the petitioner to file a discharge
application in the Court below. If the petitioner files such an
application then the Court below will consider the application of
the petitioner and will pass a reasoned order in light of the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanchan
Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2022) 9 SCC 577.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…