Patna High Court
Vinita Kumari @ Vinita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The application is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to raise points at the charge‑framing stage.
Summary
The petitioners filed an application invoking the High Court's inherent jurisdiction to quash an order dated 28 July 2025, wherein the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate‑II, Nawada, had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 323, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against them. They alleged false implication in a large‑scale firing incident and contended that the order was passed mechanically without proper consideration of the investigation report. The State opposed, stating that the police had filed a charge‑sheet on 20 February 2024 establishing a prima facie case. The Court observed that the trial court had relied on the charge‑sheet and found the petitioners involved. The petitioners then sought liberty to withdraw the application and raise their points at the charge‑framing stage. The Court granted permission, dismissed the application as withdrawn, and allowed the petitioners to raise their arguments later.
Issues considered
- Whether the order taking cognizance of the offences under IPC §§ 323, 504, 34 can be quashed on the ground of mechanical procedure and lack of evidential consideration.
- Whether the High Court can entertain the petition under its inherent jurisdiction at this stage of the criminal proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 504
Subjects
- quash order
- inherent jurisdiction
- cognizance
- IPC 323
- IPC 504
- IPC 34
- charge-sheet
- criminal procedure
- withdrawn application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.485 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2021 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada
======================================================
1. Vinita Kumari @ Vinita Devi, Wife of Gajadhar Kumar R/o Village -
Lodipur, P.S. - Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
2. Ajit Chauhan, Son of Vijay Chauhan R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. -
Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
3. Rambalak Yadav, Son of Gokul Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. -
Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
4. Rajesh Yadav, Son of Janki Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. - Pakribaraw,
Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
5. Karu Yadav, Son of Late Gajeshwar Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. -
Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
6. shantu Yadav, Son of Karu Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. - Pakribaraw,
Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
7. Pintu Yadav, Son of Karu Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. - Pakribaraw,
Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
8. Chote Yadav, Son of Mahendar Yadav R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. -
Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
9. Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Yadav @ Garjaha, Son of Nagendar Prasad R/o
Village - Baliyari, P.S. - Pakribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Akhilesh Singh, Son of Suresh Prasad Singh R/o Village - Baliyari, P.S. -
Pakaribaraw, Dist. - Nawada, Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar Pankaj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The present application has been filed by the
petitioner invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon’ble
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.485 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
Court for quashing the order dated 28.07.2025 passed by the
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Nawada in
Pakaribaraw P.S. Case No.340 of 2021 by which cognizance for
the offence under Sections 323, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal
Code has been taken against the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case, where
hundreds of persons were said to have assembled and several
rounds of firing had taken place. It has further been submitted
that the petitioners have falsely been implicated being a
Mukhiya and the order taking cognizance has been passed
mechanically without taking into account the evidence collected
during the course of investigation.
4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
and has submitted that the police has submitted charge-sheet on
20.02.2024 finding the prima facie case against the petitioners.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners
and learned APP for the state and taking into account the fact
that the police has submitted charge-sheet and from perusal of
the impugned order, it seems that the learned Trial Court had
relied upon the charge-sheet whereby it has been submitted that
the petitioners were found to be involved in the said occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.485 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners at this juncture,
pray that he is ready to withdraw the present application with a
liberty to raise all such points at the time of framing of charge,
which shall be considered and a reasoned order may be passed
by the Trial Court.
7. Permission is accorded.
8. The present application stands dismissed as
withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…