Patna High Court
DIGVIJAY PRATAP SINGHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The order dated 03‑07‑2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate is quashed as the prosecution was mala fide and amounted to an abuse of process.
Summary
The petitioner, Digvijay Pratap Singh, filed an application seeking to quash the order dated 03‑07‑2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheohar, in a complaint alleging dishonest transfer of land. The prosecution alleged that the opposite party had given Rs 35,000 to the petitioner's elder brother, Uday Pratap Singh, for a land sale, but after the brother's death the land was transferred to other accused. The petitioner contended that the amount was paid to his deceased brother, not to him, and that the prosecution was mala fide, motivated by political vendetta because he is a former MLA. The Court examined whether the complaint and the ensuing prosecution amounted to an abuse of process. Relying on the principles laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335), the Court held that the order of the magistrate was unsustainable. Consequently, the petition was allowed and the magistrate’s order was quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 03‑07‑2019 can be quashed on the ground of mala fide prosecution
- Whether the complaint constitutes an abuse of process under the principles of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Subjects
- quash order
- abuse of process
- mala fide prosecution
- political vendetta
- land transfer dispute
- criminal miscellaneous
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65649 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2018 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Sheohar
======================================================
DIGVIJAY PRATAP SINGH Son of Late Mangal Prasad Singh Resident of
Village-Madhopur Chhata, P.S.-Hiramda, District-Sheohar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar
2. Sudhir Kumar Singh Son of Late Chandeshwar Singh Resident of Village-
Madhopur Chhata,P.S.-Hiramda, District-Sheohar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard the parties. None appears on behalf of the
opposite party no. 02 despite valid service of notice.
2. This application has been filed for quashing the
order dated 03.07.2019 passed in Complaint Case No. 24 of
2018 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shoehar.
3. As per the prosecution case, the opposite party no.
02 has given Rs. 35,000/- to the landlord Uday Pratap Singh
(who was the elder brother of the petitioner and now dead) for
transferring a piece of land. Uday Pratap Singh had promised
the opposite party no. 02 that he will execute the sale deed but it
is alleged against the petitioner that he, after the death of his
elder brother, has dishonestly transferred the said piece of land
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65649 of 2019(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/2
to accused no. 2 and 3.
4. Upon perusal of the complaint case, it appears that
the alleged amount was given to the elder brother of the
petitioner and not the petitioner and the present prosecution,
appears to be mala fide one only to wreak vengeance from the
petitioner as he is in politics and ex-member of the Legislative
Assembly of Belsandi constituency.
5. In view of the aforesaid and also in view of the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of
Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335,
this application is allowed.
6. Accordingly, the order dated 03.07.2019 passed in
Complaint Case No. 24 of 2018 by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Shoehar, is hereby quashed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…