Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8029 of 2011 (3) dt.27-08-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.8029 of 2011 ====================================================== Ram Nath Sahi & Ors .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Adv. For the O.P.No.2 : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 27-08-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. In this case the petitioners are challenging the order dated 18th August 2010 whereby and whereunder the court below has taken cognizance under [STATUTE] and that order was challenged in Cr. Revn. No. 222 of 2010 and the Sessions court has also rejected the revision application and thereby approved the view of the learned Judicial Magistrate. In the complaint petition it has been alleged that the accused persons variously armed had cut the Seasam tree. When resistance was made, the accused persons resorted to brick-batting and also used Lathi and Danda and they also resorted to firing from pistol. At the same time, allegation has been made that the accused obtained thumb impression on plain stamp paper. Further allegation has been made of ransacking and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8029 of 2011 (3) dt.27-08-2012 looting of the material. It appears from the complaint petition that a trust was created by the aunt and it has been alleged that the complainant was performing Pooja-Path of the deity and was cultivating the land It has further been stated that the accused persons had created forged document and had obtained the order from Bihar Religious Trust Board. On the basis of averment made in complaint petition, the court below has taken cognizance vide the impugned order and that has been affirmed by the revisional court Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are appointed as trustees by the Bihar State Religious Trust Board and the Board, vide order dated 30th November 2010 and Board has passed the order in favour of trustees and has also directed the complainant O.P.No.2 to vacate Mandir premises and deliver the vacant possession of the same. The counsel for the petitioners submits that it is completely a vexatious case in order to put pressure so that petitioners may not come forward to take over the management of the temple and, in way, remain in possession of the property donated to the Mandir by the donee. Counsel for the O.P.No.2 has refuted the argument and submitted that from the complaint petition and the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8029 of 2011 (3) dt.27-08-2012 statements recorded during the enquiry, it cannot be said that the court has committed any error in taking cognizance holding that prima facie case is made out and admittedly the order has been passed on 30th November 2010 and the alleged occurrence is of prior date. This Court is not deciding the issue whether the statement is correct or not or it is vexatious. This Court does not find any error in the order. However, it is observed that if the court below comes to a conclusion that it is a vexatious case filed by the O.P No.2 then in that circumstance, the court will have liberty to award suitable and real cost against him. With this observation and direction, this petition is dismissed. Jay/- (Shivaji Pandey, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 324

Statute Text:
Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.