Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.518 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Manoj Kumar S/O Late Shri Surendra Singh Resident Of Village- Govindpur, P.S.- Bikram, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Krishn Kumar Singh S/O Dev Nandan Singh Resident of Village- Govindpur, P.S.- Bikram, District- Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 3 10-05-2012 Heard Mr. Shashi Kant Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 02.08.2005 passed in Complaint Case No. 826 of 2005 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gaya has been pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . This application has been preferred by the accused No.4, Manoj Kumar. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the complaint is absolutely silent as to the role of the petitioner in the entire transaction and that even in the statement made by the complainant on solemn affirmation although some allegations is directed against the other accused but no allegation was directed against the petitioner and in which circumstance the continuation of the proceedings as against this petitioner would be an abuse of the process of the Court. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.518 of 2012 (3) dt.10-05-2012 2 / 2 2 The matter was heard on 19.1.2012 when notices were issued to the opposite party No.2. Office reports that the notice was served personally on opposite party No.2. Though served the opposite party No.2 has not chosen to file any appearance through a counsel. The contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner has not been controverted by Mr. Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State who rather admits that not only the complaint but even the statement on solemn affirmation made by the complainant is silent as to the role of the petitioner in the entire occurrence. Considering the submissions of learned counsel and having perused the materials on record it is manifest that in absence of any allegation against the petitioner in the complaint, nor any role being assigned to him by the complainant in the statement made on solemn affirmation, the continuation of the proceedings as against the petitioner Manoj Kumar would be abuse of the process of the Court. Having held as such the order taking cognizance dated 2.8.2005 in so far as it relates to the petitioner Manoj Kumar, is set aside. This application is allowed. Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 504

Statute Text:
Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Insult intended to provoke breach of the peace. Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.