Patna High Court

RAJIV KUMAR @ RAJU KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 January 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: SANDEEP KUMAR

Holding

The application for quash is allowed; the order of the Judicial Magistrate dated 10‑07‑2019 and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Summary

The petitioners, a group of accused persons, filed an application to quash the order dated 10 July 2019 of the Judicial Magistrate which had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act arising from a complaint by Satendra Kumar alleging unlawful harvesting of his paddy, assault and firing. The petitioners contended that the case was a retaliatory "counter‑blast" to an earlier murder case (Punpun P.S. Case No. 206 of 2017) and therefore malicious. The State and a second respondent opposed the quash. The Court examined the material and concluded that the present proceeding was indeed filed as a counter‑complaint to the earlier case, rendering it an abuse of process. Consequently, the application was allowed and the order of the Judicial Magistrate and all subsequent proceedings were quashed.

Issues considered

The validity of the order taking cognizance of the offences under the IPC and Arms Act.
Whether the present case constitutes a malicious or retaliatory prosecution (counter‑blast) against the informant.
Whether the appropriate remedy is to quash the order and the FIR.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3)
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 341, 379, 504

Subjects

criminal law
quash of FIR
false prosecution
counter‑complaint
IPC sections
Arms Act
Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72675 of 2019
            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-352 Year-2018 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
     ======================================================
1.    Rajiv Kumar @ Raju Kumar Son Of Sri Mahendra Prasad @ Mahendra
      Singh Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
2.   Chandan Kumar Son Of Sri Mahendra Prasad @ Mahendra Singh Resident
     Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
3.   Mahendra Prasad @ Mahendra Singh Son Of Late Munni Yadav @ Late
     Munni Singh Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
4.   Pinki Kumari @ Pinki Devi Wife Of Sri Raj Kumar @ Raju Kumar Resident
     Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
5.   Mahadeo Yadav @ Mahadeo Prasad Son Of Munni Yadav @ Munni Singh
     Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
6.   Mahanand Yadav @ Mahanand Singh Son Of Late Yogeshwar Yadav @
     Late Yogeshwar Singh Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt -
     Patna.
7.   Nitish Kumar @ Pintu Son Of Mahadeo Yadav @ Mahadeo Prasad Resident
     Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
8.   Jai Prakash Yadav @ Vidya Nand Yadav Son Of Late Yogeshwar Yadav @
     Late Yogeshwar Singh Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt -
     Patna.
9.   Subhash Kumar Son Of Sri Jai Prakash Yadav @ Vidya Nand Yadav
     Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
10. Sakuntala Devi Wife Of Sri Mahadeo Prasad Resident Of Village - Manorah,
    P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
11. Shushma Devi D/O Sri Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Yadav Resident Of
    Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.
12. Nilam Devi Wife Of Sri Sahdeo Yadav Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.-
    Punpun, Distt - Patna.
13. Dharamshila Devi @ Kushum Devi Wife Of Sri Mahanand Yadav @
    Mahanand Singh Resident Of Village - Manorah, P.S.- Punpun, Distt - Patna.

                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                           Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Satendra Kumar Son of Late Rajendra Prasad Resident of Village -
     Manorah, P.S.- Manorah, Distt - Patna.

                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
     For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP
     For the O.P. No. 2       :       Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Advocate
                                      Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate
         Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72675 of 2019(4) dt.27-01-2026
                                                     2/4




                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   27-01-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

                   APP for the State and the learned Senior counsel for the O.P.

                   No. 2.

                                2. This application has been filed for quashing of the

                   order dated 10.07.2019 passed by the Learned Judicial

                   Magistrate, 1st Class,, Masaurih, Patna by which the cognizance

                   was taken in this case for the offence under Sections 147, 149,

                   341, 323,307, 379, 504 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act in

                   connection with Punpun P.S. Case No.- 352 of 2018.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant

                   namely Satendra Kumar, a resident of village Manorah Punpun,

                   Patna, filed a written complaint before the Learned S.D.J.M.,

                   Masaurih, Patna, on 14.12.2018, bearing Complaint Case No.

                   715(c)/2018. He alleges that on 09.12.2018, at 10:00 A.M., the

                   accused persons unlawfully harvested paddy crops from his

                   land. When the complainant protested, the accused assaulted

                   him using the butt of a pistol and other weapons, such as lathis

                   and iron rods. As the complainant fled towards his house, the

                   accused fired at him. Thereafter, his nephew, Aditya Kumar,

                   sent a letter on 02.11.2018 to various authorities, including the

                   S.D.O. Masaurih, District Magistrate, Patna, and the Dy.S.P.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72675 of 2019(4) dt.27-01-2026
                                            3/4




          Masaurih, requesting security, but no action was taken. As a

          result, Satendra Kumar attached land receipts and a possession

          certificate to his complaint, claiming a loss of Rs. 1,00,000. The

          complainant then requested that the case be referred to the

          Punpun Police Station under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. After

          receiving the complaint, the learned S.D.J.M., Patna, passed an

          order on 14.12.2018, directing that the complaint be forwarded

          under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for the registration of an FIR.

          Consequently, the FIR was lodged on 21.12.2018.

                       4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

          after conclusion of the investigation, the police submitted charge

          sheet in this case vide Charge Sheet No.- 158 of 2019 against

          the accused persons for the offence under Sections 147, 149,

          341, 323, 307, 379, 504 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act.

                       5. The learned counsel for the petitioners further

          submits that earlier, one Raj Kumar Singh had lodged Punpun

          P.S. Case No. 206 of 2017 against the informant and others for

          the offence under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code,

          and Section 27 of the Arms Act and the present case is nothing

          but a counterblast of Punpun P.S. Case No. 206 of 2017 only to

          save the skin.

                       6. The learned APP for the State and the learned
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72675 of 2019(4) dt.27-01-2026
                                                        4/4




                      Senior counsel for the O.P. No. 2 have opposed the prayer of the

                      petitioners.

                                   7. I have heard and considered the submissions of the

                      parties and have gone through the records of the case. From the

                      perusal of the materials available on record, it appears that the

                      present case has been filed by the informant against the

                      petitioner as a counterblast to the earlier murder case.

                                   8. In view of the aforesaid discussions, the application

                      stands allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 10.07.2019 passed

                      by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Masaurih, Patna in

                      Punpun P.S. Case No. 352 of 2018 and all consequential

                      proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are hereby quashed.



                                                              (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…