Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.47587 of 2008 ===================================================== Kishor Kumar Sharma, son of Late Madheshwar Prasad Sharma, resident of village and PO-Kurkuri, P.S. Paliganj, District-Patna, at present residing at Amrita Apartment, Flat No.401, Arrah Garden, Bailey Road, Patna-14, P.S. Rupaspur, District-Patna. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Murari Prasad Singh, son of Late Ram Bahadur Singh, Senior Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Exhibition Road, Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties. ===================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : M/s. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Sr. Advocate & Raj Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Anup Kumar Sinha, Advocate. ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA CAV ORDER ------------------ 5 23-03-2012 The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order dated 21.8.2008 passed in Rupaspur P.S. Case No.82 of 2008 by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, Patna, taking cognizance of the offence under [STATUTE] as also the entire criminal proceedings, arising out of the aforesaid case, against the petitioner. 2. The brief fact, leading to this application, is that on the basis of the written report of the opposite party no.2, Murari Prasad Singh, Senior Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47587 of 2008 (5) dt.23-03-2012 2 / 5 2 Exhibition Road, Patna, Rupaspur P.S. Case No.82 of 2008 was instituted under [STATUTE] , in which the opposite party no.2 has alleged that in the light of the order dated 14.5.2008 in the case bearing R.P. No.169 of 2002 (Union Bank of India Vs. Amrita Sales) and the request of J.S. Manral, the Recovery Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal, he alongwith Sri Rajeev Narayan, the Recovery Inspector of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Sri P.R. Kumar, the Senior Manager (Legal) of the Regional Office of the Union Bank of India and Debts Recovery, Sri Navneet Kumar, reached on 22.5.2008 at 4.30 P.M. at Amrita Apartment, Arrah Garden Road, Bailey Road, Patna, which is mortgaged in the said case, for service of notice of the auction order. In course of returning, after the service of notice of the auction order, one person, on a black bullet motorcycle bearing Registration No.BR- 1F-5999 on which ‘Kishore’ was written, speedily came and pointed out a pistol at them giving threatening to kill and started to abuse them. When they tried to convince him, he caused blood oozing injury to Priyaranjan Kumar, from the butt portion of the revolver. In the meantime, 10-15 of his associates rushed there and, thereafter, he alongwith others were surrounded and abused by them giving threatening to kill. In the meantime, Mr. A.K. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47587 of 2008 (5) dt.23-03-2012 3 / 5 3 Sharan, the counsel of the Bank, reached there and informed the Regional Office of the Union Bank of India and the authorized E- Force Agent of the Bank on phone and then the Senior Officials of the Bank alongwith Guards came there and saved him and others. 3. After investigation, the police submitted the chargesheet in the court of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, Patna, who on perusal of the chargesheet and the case diary took the cognizance of the offence against the petitioner under [STATUTE] through the impugned order dated 21.8.2008. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner made submission that, in fact, the opposite party no.2 was making the house trespass forcibly in the residential premises of the petitioner without any authority of the competent court and assistance of the police regarding which, the petitioner has lodged the First Information Report bearing Rupaspur P.S. Case No.81 of 2008 on 22.5.2008, due to that reason the opposite party no.2 has lodged the First Information Report bearing Rupaspur P.S. Case No.82 of 2008, maliciously, later on, on 22.5.2008 and on submission of the chargesheet cognizance has been taken against the petitioner through the impugned order. As such, lodging of the F.I.R. bearing Rupaspur P.S. Case No.82 of 2008 against the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47587 of 2008 (5) dt.23-03-2012 4 / 5 4 petitioner by the opposite party no.2 is malicious and is liable to be quashed. It has also been submitted that the impugned order, taking cognizance of the offence, has been passed by the learned Magistrate in a mechanical way without application of mind. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State made submission that the witnesses in the case diary have supported the case of the prosecution, as alleged in the First Information Report of the opposite party no.2, and the injury report of Priyaranjan Kumar, who is said to be sustained injury, is also detailed in paragraph-32 of the case diary. As such, the learned Magistrate has rightly taken the cognizance of the offence against the accused-petitioner. 6. On perusal of the case diary, it appears that while the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report but his name has been disclosed by the witnesses, Basant Kumar and Yogendra Kumar, who are Guards of the Amrita Apartment, in paragraph-10 of the case diary and both the witnesses have stated about abusing by the petitioner to the opposite party no.2 and others, named in the F.I.R.. The witnesses, in paragraphs 5, 16, 17 and 18 of the case diary, have supported the prosecution case. Section 32 of the case diary is the injury report of Priyaranjan Kumar, who is alleged to have sustained injury caused by the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47587 of 2008 (5) dt.23-03-20

Applicable IPC Section: 323

Statute Text:
Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing hurt. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.