Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.42716 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. Satendra Kumar Pandey son of late Mukhdeo Pandey. 2. Rajesh Kumar Pandey @ Pappu Pandey son of Satendra Kumar Pandey. 3. Pintu Pandey @ Rakesh Kumar Pandey son of Satendra Kumar Pandey. 4. Munna Pandey @ Pratap Kumar Pandey son of Bachhu Pandey. 5. Rinku Pandey @ Amit Kumar Pandey son of Bachhu Pandey. All are residents of Village-Naur, P.S.-Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Sheo Kumari Devi wife of late Ash Narayan Pandey, resident of Village-Naur, P.S.-Nabinagar, District-Aurangabad. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. Rang Nath Pandey For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 7 15-03-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2. This application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is to quash the order dated 01.05.2008, passed in Nabinagar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2007 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, taking cognizance of the offence under [STATUTE] against the accused- petitioners. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners made submission that while the First Information Report was lodged against Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42716 of 2008 (7) dt.15-03-2012 2/2 eight accused but on investigation the police submitted the charge-sheet against five accused. In fact, no occurrence as alleged in the First Information Report took place and the First Information Report was lodged due to land dispute between the parties, which is going on since long and regarding that land the proceeding under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also initiated, which was decided in favour of accused-petitioners. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on going through the charge-sheet and case diary, arrived at conclusion that prima facie case under [STATUTE] is made out against the accused-petitioners and, accordingly, took the cognizance of the offence under the aforesaid sections. As such, I find no illegality in the impugned order amounting to abuse of the process of the Court for interference in inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. As far as the submission as advanced on behalf of petitioners is concerned, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise all points, raised herein, at appropriate stage in trial Court. Safik/- (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 325

Statute Text:
Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.