Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.6471 of 2011 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bishnu Kant Dubey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 20-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. In this case, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 1.12.2010 by which the Court below has refused to discharge the petitioner from the offences in connection with Phulwari P.S. Case No. 492 of 2009 dated 11.12.2009. The court below after examining the evidence on record and on perusal of the statement recorded in paragraphs 1, 5, 6, 9 and 21 of the case diary has found that it is a strong prima facie case available against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that incident has taken place on 8.11.2009 which led to filing of a U.D. Case (Annexure- 3) as it was unnatural death as no criminal action was involved from the side of petitioners. A Punchnama was prepared in which half share was given to the son of the deceased but later on the informant exerted pressure that the land should be transferred by a registered deed with regard to the half share which was earlier prepared in his name and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6471 of 2011 (3) dt.20-04-2012 2 after span of one month the present case was filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is completely a maliciously prosecution and when the petitioner refused to alienate the property by registered deed only thereafter the present case has been filed against them. The counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no explanation for the delay caused in registering the present criminal case . In support of his contention petitioners have relied on a case reported in 1992 Supple, (I) S.C.C. the State of Haryana versus Bhajan Lal and others where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. In that circumstance, the Court should quash the proceedings. Petitioners want to bring their case within four corners of the aforesaid case. Counsel for the State has disputed the contention of the petitioners and stated that the case is not covered by Bhajan Lal’s case as it is very easy to make allegation mala fide but it is very difficult to prove the same. In the present case there is statement made by the informant as well as by the sister of the informant which itself shows the case under [STATUTE] is made out. Having considered rival argument of the parties, this Court is not giving any opinion of the merit of the case, however, looking the nature of the order that has been passed by the Court below Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6471 of 2011 (3) dt.20-04-2012 3 it can be said that a strong suspicion is not made out against the petitioners. Accordingly, this petition does not survive. The same is dismissed. Ravi/- (Shivaji Pandey, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 304

Statute Text:
Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder, If act by which the death is caused is done with intention of causing death, etc. Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both, if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.