Patna High Court
Pintu KumarversusState Of Bihar and Anr
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
The application for quashing the order was dismissed as infructuous.
Summary
The petitioner, Pintu Kumar, filed an application seeking to quash the order dated 29 May 2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, which had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 406, 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The defence evidence in the original case was closed on 25 September 2025, and the matter was scheduled for defence arguments on 23 February 2026. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the pending application had become infructuous because the trial was effectively concluded. The State, represented by an A.P.P., raised no objection to the petitioner's request. The Court, agreeing with the petitioner's submission, disposed of the application as infructuous, without ordering any further proceedings.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate disposition of an application for quashing a criminal order when the trial has effectively concluded and the application is deemed infructuous?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420, 506
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash petition
- infructuous
- Section 406 IPC
- Section 420 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59997 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2018 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
Pintu Kumar S/o Raj Nandan Pandit, R/o Vill.- Siddhartha Puri Colony, P.S.-
Mufassil and District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ranvijay Kumar S/o Mahadeo Prasad, R/o Vill.- Nauranga, P.S.- Muffasil
and District- Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2, Advocate
Mr. Gajendra Kr. Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. This application has been filed for quashing the
order dated 29.05.2018 passed by learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gaya in Mufassil P.S. Case No.02 of 2018 whereby
and whereunder the court concerned took cognizance under
Sections 406, 420 and 506 of I.P.C. and Section 138 of
Negotiable Instrument Act against the petitioner.
3. From the status report received from the court
concerned, it appears that defence evidence was closed on
25.09.2025 and, therefore, the same was fixed for argument and
the record was fixed to conclude defence argument on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59997 of 2018(5) dt.01-05-2026
2/2
23.02.2026.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this
case may be disposed of as it has now become infructuous.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has no objection to this
prayer of the petitioner.
6. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner, this application is disposed of as having become
infructuous.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Harish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.