Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33847 of 2009 (2) dt.14-02-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.33847 of 2009 ====================================================== 1.Ram Narayan Yadav @ Lalit Yadav 2. Ganga Ram Yadav 3. Kameshwar Yadav 4. Balli Yadav 5. Bindeshwar Yadav .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagdish Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nayan Deo Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 14-02-2012 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to quash the order dated 29.11.2008/01.12.2008 passed in G.R. No. 1585 of 2008 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani, taking cognizance of the offence under [STATUTE] against the accused-petitioners and also the order dated 3.6.2009 passed in Criminal Revision no. 125 of 2009 by the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani as preferred by the accused-petitioners against the aforesaid cognizance order, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the criminal revision application. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33847 of 2009 (2) dt.14-02-2012 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that from the report of the medical Board no injury was found on the person of the informant and others alleged to be sustained injury. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that except the First information Report there is no material in the case diary to show the case covered under [STATUTE] . On going through the order dated 3.6.2009 passed in Cr. Revision no. 125 of 2009, it appears that the learned Sessions Judge on perusal of the materials available in the case diary including earlier report of the doctor who had found the injury grievous in nature arrived at conclusion that Magistrate is not supposed to examine the material on record meticulously and accordingly dismissed the criminal revision preferred by the accused-petitioners. I find no any illegality for interference in inherent jurisdiction. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. Petitioners are at liberty to raise all the points in trial Court at appropriate stage. Arun kumar/- (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 341

Statute Text:
Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code. Wrongfully restraining any person. Whoever wrongfully restrains any person shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.