Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.13915 of 2012 ====================================================== Rita Gupta, W/o Ishwar Prasad Gupta, resident of Shashtinagar, Ward No.11, P.S. & District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. B.N. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 2 06-04-2012 Heard Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. B.N. Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13.05.2010 passed in Case No.CC-315 of 2002, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria has been pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under [STATUTE] against the petitioner. With the consent of the parties the matter has been taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself. The short facts leading to the order impugned is that an FIR was instituted by the petitioner giving rise to Araria P.S. Case No.266 of 2002 registered for offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The police upon investigation submitted final form bearing No.336 of 2002 dated 31.10.2002 holding the case untrue against the accused persons and recommended for proceedings against the informant of the said case, i.e. the present petitioner under Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13915 of 2012 (2) dt.06-04-2012 2 [STATUTE] . The said recommendation was registered as Non-FIR No.12 of 2002 dated 16.11.2002 which was registered as Case No.CC-315 of 2002 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria on 18.11.2002 against the petitioner for offense punishable under [STATUTE] . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from the fact that the case is not sustainable on merits, even if the recommendation is taken on its face value, yet the proceedings is not sustainable in the light of the provisions underlying section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’). He submits that in absence of any order condoning the delay under section 468 of the Code the order taking cognizance is not sustainable. Learned counsel in support of his contention submits that whereas the maximum punishment under [STATUTE] is six months, the punishment provided for offence under section 211 is two years with a rider that if the offence charged by the informant which has been found to be false for offence punishable with death, imprisonment of life or imprisonment of seven years the term shall extend to seven years. It is in this regard submitted that the FIR was instituted by the petitioner against the accused for offences punishable under [STATUTE] , of which the maximum punishment could be awarded is under [STATUTE] and is punishable with imprisonment of one year or fine or both. He thus submits that the provisions of section 468 of the Code prescribe the limitation period of one year in such cases with power of condonation of delay caused in taking such cognizance. The learned Magistrate having failed to do so and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13915 of 2012 (2) dt.06-04-2012 3 having failed to condone the delay in taking cognizance after unexplained delay of one year, the proceedings are not sustainable. The legal position so contested by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner could not be controverted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Having heard learned counsel and having perused the materials on record as also the statutory provisions underlying the contention advanced the impugned order can not sustain. In the result, this application is allowed, the order dated 13.05.2010 passed in Case No.CC-315 of 2002 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria and the entire proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. SKPathak/- (Jyoti Saran, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 279

Statute Text:
Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code. Driving or riding on a public way so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life, etc. Whoever drives any vehicle, or rides, on any public way in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person, 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.