Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.40001 of 2010 ====================================================== 1. Pramod Kumar. 2. Binod Kumar. Both are son of Late Shiv Narayan Gupta, Resident of Mohalla – D.B. Road, Sahrsha, P.S. – Sadar, District – Saharsha. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Ranjeet Vats, Officer-in-charge, Sadar P.S., Saharsa. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 08-05-2012 Heard Sri Krishna Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Panchanand Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Two petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 07.09.2010, passed in G.R. No. 721 of 2009/ Tr. No. 450 of 2010, by learned Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa. By the said order learned Magistrate has rejected the petition filed under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the petitioners for their discharge. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that for petty offence i.e. for offence under [STATUTE] and Section 47(A) of the Excise Act, petitioners have already remained in custody for some time, and as such, putting Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40001 of 2010 (2) dt.08-05-2012 2 / 2 2 the petitioners on trial will be excessive for the petitioners. On this ground it has been prayed for setting aside the order. After hearing the parties and perusing the impugned order, the court is satisfied that learned Magistrate has committed no error in rejecting the discharge petition. On sympathetic ground power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may not be exercised. The petition stands dismissed. It goes without saying that learned Magistrate without being prejudiced with this order may proceed with the case in accordance with law. Praful/- (Rakesh Kumar, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 188

Statute Text:
Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. Disobedience to an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant, If such disobedience causes obstruction, annoyance or injury to persons lawfully employed. Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his management disobeys such direction, shall, if such disobedience causes or tends to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any persons lawfully employed, be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both; and if such disobedience causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety, or causes or tends to cause a riot or affray, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.