Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Surendra Kumar @ Surendra Kumar YadavversusState Of Bihar and Anr

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The petition was disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to present his points before the trial court.

Summary

Surendra Kumar Yadav filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash two orders: one dated 10-08-2018 by the Sessions Judge dismissing his revision petition, and another dated 10-07-2017 by the SDJM rejecting his petition under Section 239. The petitioner argued that the orders were erroneous and requested liberty to raise all points before the trial court. The State did not oppose the petitioner's request. The High Court, after hearing counsel, disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the trial court with the raised points. No substantive merits of the orders were adjudicated; the case was essentially closed with the liberty granted.

Issues considered

  • Whether the orders of the Sessions Judge and the SDJM can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC
  • Whether the petitioner should be allowed liberty to raise his points before the trial court

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Criminal Procedure
  • Section 482
  • Section 239
  • Quash Order
  • High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61597 of 2018
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2013 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Surendra Kumar @ Surendra Kumar Yadav S/o Late Subhag Lal Yadav,
                 Resident of Village- Dhanauja, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    State Of Bihar
           2.    Birendra Kumar, S/o Late Subhag Lal Yadav, R/o Village- Dhanauja, P.S.-
                 Phulparas, District- Madhubani.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Sri Chandrasen Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   20-04-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The present petition has been filed under Section

                   482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 10.08.2018 passed by

                   the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani in Cr. Rev. No. 791 of

                   2017, 872 of 2017 by which the said revision petition filed by

                   the petitioner was dismissed and further for quashing the order

                   dated 10.07.2017 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jhanjharpur in

                   G.R. Case No. 311 of 2013, Phulparas P.S. Case No. 49 of 2013,

                   T.R. No. 1966 of 2017 by which petition of the petitioner filed

                   under Section 239 Cr.P.C. was rejected.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61597 of 2018(3) dt.20-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        case may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take all

                        the points raised in the petition before the Trial Court at the

                        appropriate stage.

                                     4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has no objection to this

                        prayer of the petitioner.

                                     5. Accordingly, the present case is disposed of with

                        liberty to the petitioner, as prayed for.



                                                (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
rakhi/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.