IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.832 of 2008 1. BHUPENDRA MALLICK S/O- LATE JAG NARAYAN MALLICK, QR. NO. A NEAR P.W.D. HEAD OFFICER WATER TOWER ROAD NO. 2 BEHIND KHIGH COURT P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTRICT- PATNA AT PRESENT POSTED AS SECTION OFFICER, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT VISHWASHWARIYA BHAWAN, 3RD FLOOR, BAILY ROAD, P.S.- SECRETARIATE, DISTRICT- PATNA. 2. BIRENDRA SINGH @ BIRENDRA KUMAR SINHA, S/O- LATE MOHAN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-ALIPUR, P.S.- PARWALPUR, DISTRICT- NALANDA. PRESENT ADDRESS- ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, VIKASH BHAWAN, P.S.- SECRETARIATE, DISTRICT- PATNA. 3. ARUN KUMAR SINGH, S/O- LATE GANESH PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-SISAI, P.S.- BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT- GOPALGANJ PRESENT ADDRESS- STASTICAL SUPERVISOR, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, VIKASH BHAWAN, P.S.- SECRETARIATE, DISTRICT- PATNA. 4. NEERAJ KUMAR, S/O- LATE DWARIKA RAM, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-RUPASPUR, P.O.- SAHAY NAGAR, P.S.- DANAPUR, DISTRICT- PATNA. 5. SHASHI SHARMA, S/O- SHRI SHIV DANI SINGH, PRESENT ADDRESS- ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA. 6. ROOPLAL YADAV, S/O- SHRI CHAMARU PRASAD YADAV, PRESENT ADDRESS- ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA. 7. RAJ NATH RAY, S/O- PARMA RAY, PRESENT ADDRESS ,PEON DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, VIKASH BHAWAN, P.S.- SECRETARIAT, DISTRICT-PATNA 8. SMT. SHANTI MALLICK, W/O- SHRI BHUPENDRA MALLICK QR. NO. 1/11 NEAR P.W.D HEAD OFFICE,, WATER TOWER ROAD NO. 2, BEHIND PATNA HIGH COURT P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTRICT- PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAHUL KUMAR, S/O- LATE DINESH MAHTO,RESIDENT OF MOHALLA RUPASPUR, DANAPUR, P.S.- DANAPUR, DISTRICT- PATNA. PRESENT RESIDING AT BIHAR VETERINARY COLLEGE, P.S.- SHASTRI NAGAR, DISTRICT- PATNA. For the petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Lal Das, Advocate. For the O.P : Mr. Aditya Nath Pandey, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 2 3 16.08.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 7.5.2008 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case no. 3285(C) of 2006 whereby his application for discharge filed under Section 245 Cr.P.C. has been considered and rejected as it was found that there is sufficient evidence on record justifying framing of charge. While assailing the order impugned, it is contended that the application for discharge dated 27.2.2008 was directed to be heard on 27.5.2008 by order dated 7.5.2008 whereas the order was passed on 7.5.2008 itself. It appears that as the pleadings were complete and the parties were in attendance, it was subsequently deemed expedient to consider and dispose of the same. In that view of the matter, no illegality can be found in the order impugned. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prior to filing of the present complaint, the petitioners (accuseds) had filed a Complaint Case against the present complainant under diverse sections of Indian Penal Code including Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. It is thus contended that the present prosecution was malicious prosecution. I am afraid such a consideration can be made at the stage of framing of charge considering the confines of the jurisdiction invoked by the petitioners. 3 There is no merit in this application. It is accordingly dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )