Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.14899 of 2009 ====================================================== Dr. Dinesh Chandra Singh, son of Sameshwar Nath Singh, D.G.M. Personal Department, U.C.O. Bank, H.O. Calcutta (W.B.) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Kamal Nayan Gopal, son of late Jangi Gopal Paswan, resident of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Manshi, Khagaria. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashwini Kumar, Sinha, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kr. Pandey, Adv. For the State : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Singh, A.P.P. For the Opposite party No. 2 : Mr. Puroshotam Kr. Jha, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kr., Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 4. 19-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 28.1.2009 passed in G.R. No. 1310 of 2007 arising out of S.C./S.T. P.S. Munger Case No. 64 of 2007 by which the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, has differed with the final report and taken cognizance under [STATUTE] . The case of the prosecution is that he was an Officer posted at Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Manshi, Khagaria and on account of an accident, he had lost both his legs. Under these circumstances, he gave an application to the petitioner who Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14899 of 2009 (4) dt.19-04-2012 2 / 3 2 was the Chairman of the Bank not to transfer him, despite this, the petitioner who was the Chairman of the Bank transferred him from Medni Choki to Manshi Branch. He gave an application before him that on account of his incapacity, he may be allowed to remain on the previous station but the petitioner did not agree to it. So, the Informant went to Manshi Branch and gave his joining and, thereafter, he returned to the house of the petitioner to once again plead with the petitioner for his transfer but the petitioner allegedly got angry and told him to get out of the house pushing and hurling abuses by calling him his caste name. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the allegations contained in the First Information Report itself, it appears that the Informant was aggrieved when his favour was refused by the petitioner and it is on account of vengeance the present First Information Report was instituted. It is for this reason that final report was submitted in the matter. On the other hand, the counsel for the Opposite party No. 2 submits that the petitioner had in fact, misbehaved with him and, therefore, the present case. Having gone through the First Information Report, I am convinced on the face of record that the present proceeding is a sheer abuse of the process of the Court having been lodged for Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14899 of 2009 (4) dt.19-04-2012 3 / 3 3 reasons of malice with a view to teach the petitioner a lesson for not having favoured him. In the result, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 28.1.2009 passed in G.R. No. 1310 of 2007 arising out of S.C./S.T. P.S. Munger Case No. 64 of 2007 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, is hereby quashed. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)

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.