Patna High Court
Praveen Kumar JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The application under Section 528 is dismissed as it lacks merit and the trial court's framing of charges is upheld.
Summary
The petitioner, Praveen Kumar Jha, filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash the order of the District and Additional Sessions Judge that rejected his discharge petition under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the order taking cognizance of the case. The petitioner argued that no specific allegation under the Indian Penal Code was made against him and that the matter was a case and counter‑case between the parties. The High Court examined the record and noted that charges had been framed against the petitioner under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 307 of the IPC, each with the proviso of Section 34, indicating that the allegations were clearly explained. The Court held that the trial court had sufficient grounds to proceed, especially under Section 307 IPC with common intention, and therefore found no merit in the petition. Consequently, the application was dismissed as being devoid of merit.
Issues considered
- Whether the petition under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing the order rejecting the discharge petition is maintainable.
- Whether the trial court correctly framed charges against the petitioner under the IPC sections cited.
- Whether there is any specific allegation against the petitioner that would warrant quashing the order taking cognizance.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 227
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 341
Subjects
- quash order
- discharge petition
- Section 528 BNS Sanhita
- Section 227 CrPC
- IPC offences
- common intention
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34607 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2023 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Praveen Kumar Jha S/o Late Chaturanand Mishra R/o Village- Ladari, P.S.
Keoti, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Santosh Kumar Jha S/o Late Chandrakant Jha R/o Village- Ladari, P.S.-
Keoti, District- Darbhanga
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mrs. Kanchan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party-State: Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 23-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner
seeking quashing of the order dated 15.01.2025 passed in S.T.
621 of 2023, arising out of Keoti P.S. Case No. 153 of 2023, by
the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-VII,
Darbhanga, whereby the discharge petition filed by the
petitioner under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
has been rejected. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the
order taking cognizance dated 14.08.2023 passed by learned
J.M.F.C., Darbhanga.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34607 of 2025(2) dt.23-03-2026
2/2
that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner so as to
attract the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and there is a
case and counter case between the parties.
4. From perusal of the record itself, it appears that by
order dated 04.02.2025, the charges have been framed against
the petitioner under Sections 341/34, 323/34, 324/34 and 307/34
IPC, and hence, it is clear from the record that the accusation
has been explained to the petitioner. The case being under
Section 307/34 IPC and the learned trial court having found that
there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the petitioner
with the aid of common intention, this Court is not inclined to
interfere with the impugned order.
5. This application is devoid of any merit and is
accordingly dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…