Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.19318 of 2008 1. Indu Devi @ Manju Devi, wife of Daddan Singh. 2. Gyaneshwar Singh, son of Late Gupta Singh. 3. Rama Nand Singh. 4. Ram Pravesh Singh, son of Sri Devnandan Singh. 5. Ashok Kumar Singh, son of Dr. K.K. Singh. 6. Bunty Singh, son of Sri Vishnu Deo Singh. 7. Krishna Singh, son of Vishnu Deo Singh. 8. Arvind Singh @ Arvind Kumar Singh, son of Rameshwar Singh. 9. Ganesh Prasad, son of Janardan Prasad. 10. Janardan Prasad, son of Badri Lal. All resident of Muhalla-Satendra Nagar, Block Colony, P.S. Aurangabad (T), District-Aurangabad. ………………………………………………...Petitioners. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Amit Kumar Singh, son of Ashok Singh, resident of Muhalla-Satendra Nagar, Block Colony, P.S. Aurangabad (T), District-Aurangabad. ………………………………………Opposite Parties. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Rana Pratap Singh, Senior Advocate and Rakesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Abhimanyu Shama, A.P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate. ------------------------------------ O R D E R 8. 13.1.2012 The petitioners have approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the order dated 30.1.2008 passed in Complaint Case No.326 2 of 2004 /Trial No.1078 of 2008 by the court of Sri P. Paswan, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, adding [STATUTE] in his earlier order dated 10.8.2005, summoning the accused- petitioners finding prima facie case under [STATUTE] , in the light of the order dated 16.1.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Aurangabad in Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005, as preferred by the opposite party no.2, Amit Kumar Singh, and also the order dated 16.1.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Aurangabad in Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005, filed by the opposite party no.2 Amit Kumar Singh, allowing the aforesaid Criminal Revision, directing the Magistrate, in seisin of the case, to pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in the order. A prayer has also been made to quash the entire criminal proceedings, arising out of the aforesaid complaint case, against the accused- petitioners. 2. In brief the case is that the opposite party no.2, Amit Kumar Singh, had lodged the F.I.R., registered as Aurangabad Nagar P.S. Case No.541 of 2002 on 3 15.12.2002 under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act against the accused-petitioners. The police on investigation of the case submitted the final form due to lack of evidence on 31.5.2003. Thereafter, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, accepting the final form proceeded on protest petition of opposite party no.2, numbed as Complaint Case No.326 of 2004. The court of Sri P. Paswan, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, on inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, summoned the accused-petitioners finding prima facie case under [STATUTE] vide order dated 10.8.2005. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order dated 10.8.2005, the opposite party no.2 preferred the Criminal Revision, numbered as Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005, which was allowed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Aurangabad, vide order dated 16.1.2008, with observation that there is material on record to proceed against the accused for the offence under [STATUTE] apart from [STATUTE] , under which the 4 accused-petitioners have already been summoned vide order dated 10.8.2005, directing the Magistrate, in seisin of the case, to pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in the order. On receiving the copy of the aforesaid order dated 16.1.2008 passed in Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005, the court of Sri P. Paswan, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, passed the order on 30.1.2008 to add [STATUTE] in the order dated 10.8.2005, summoning the accused-petitioners finding prima facie case under [STATUTE] . 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners made submission that once the Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005, as preferred by the opposite party no.2 against the order dated 10.8.2005, whereby the accused-petitioners were summoned under [STATUTE] , was allowed with a direction to the Magistrate, in seisin of the case, to pass a fresh order in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in the order, the Magistrate has no option but to enquire the matter afresh and pass appropriate 5 orders, but the learned Magistrate has added only [STATUTE] in the earlier summoning order dated 10.8.2005, which is illegal and amounts to abuse of the process of the court. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 made submission that there is no illegality in the order dated 30.1.2008 passed by the court of Sri P. Paswan, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, adding [STATUTE] in the earlier order dated 10.8.2005, summoning the accused-petitioners finding prima facie case under [STATUTE] in Complaint Case No.326 of 2004, in the light of the order dated 16.1.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Aurangabad, in Criminal Revision No.63 of 2005. 5. It appears from the record that after accepting the final form submitted by the police on investigation in Aurangabad (T) P.S. Case No.541 of 2002 lodged by the opposite party no.2, his prote

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.