0

The Party Is Obliged To Follow The Undertaking Given In Front Of Court: Patna High Court

Blog , , , ,

Citation: CR. MISC. No.39089 of 2023

Decided On: 16-10-2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma

Introduction:

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present quashing application has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR being Patliputra P.S. Case No. 386 of 2023 dated 12.05.2023, registered under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Facts:

The learned counsel submits that the aforesaid F.I.R. was instituted by the Opposite Party, it is next submitted that the offences are compoundable and the parties have entered into a compromise dated 20.09.2023. The learned for the Opposite Party does not object to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners but submits that in the compromise dated 20.09.2023, three conditions were there out of which two conditions have been fulfilled by the petitioners but the third conditions which was with respect to withdrawal of Complaint Case No. 4801 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M, Patna which was instituted by the petitioners against the Opposite Party till date has not been withdrawn though in the compromise it was clearly recorded that the petitioners will withdraw the said case also.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the next date fixed in the Complaint Case 4801 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned C.J.M, Patna is 03.11.2023 and on the said date the said complaint case shall be positively withdrawn by the petitioners, since the parties have compromised and the learned counsel for petitioners, on behalf of the petitioners, have undertaken before this Court that Complaint Case No. 4801 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned C.J.M, Patna shall be withdrawn on 03.11.2023 in terms of the compromise dated 20.09.2023.

Court’s analysis and Judgement:

In the event if the petitioners violates the undertaking given before this Court that petitioners will withdraw the Complaint Case No. 4801 of 2023 pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Patna in that event the Opposite Party shall be at liberty to bring the said fact to the notice of the Court. Stating that the court allowed the quashing of the application.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

0
hc patna

Giving The Colour Of Criminal Case To A Civil Dispute Is An Abuse Of The Process Of The Court: Patna High Court

Blog , , , ,

Citation: CR. MISC. No.21467 of 2023

Decided On: 16-10-2023

Coram: : Honourable Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh

Introduction:

The petitioner has put to challenge in the present application filed under section 482 of the CrPC the order taking cognizance dated 26.02.2020 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Saran at Chapra in connection with Complaint Case No. 343 of 2020, by which learned ACJM- V has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 323, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against this petitioner.

Facts:

It is the allegation made in the complaint petition of the Opposite Party that the father of accused Banaras Singh executed sale deed in favour of his mother Dhandai Devi in the year 1949 with respect to land pertaining to Khata No. 84 , Plot No. 1478 admeasuring 2 Bigha, 12 Katha 14 Dhoor, Khata No. 84, Plot No. 1514 admeasuring 1 Bigha 16 Katha 17 Dhoor, and Khata No. 85 Plot No. 1518 admeasuring 2 katha 3 Dhoor. After the total area of the land said to have been transferred by Banaras Singh was thus 4 Bigha 11 Katha and 14 Dhoor.

It is the case of opposite party that after execution of sale deed, Dhandai Devi had come in possession and thereafter the land was in possession of the complainant. The gist of allegation in the complaint petition that on 20.01.2020 accused Puran Singh declared that he had sold 7 Katha land of Khata No. 84 Plot No. 1478 at Kamalpur Petrol Pump. It is the case of the complainant that the land which belonged to the complainant was thus fraudulently purchased by this petitioner from accused Puran Singh. Nawaji Ali also got executed sale deed in his favour by Puran Singh.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

On close reading of the complaint petition, leaves no room for doubt, that it pure and simple civil dispute which has been given the colour of criminal case. No offence punishable under sections 323, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against this petitioner. The filing of the complaint case as against this petitioner is an abuse of the process of the court. Hence The complaint petition was quashed.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

0

Appeal Of Petitioner Dismissed As The Court Couldn’t Find Enough Ground To Question The Challenged Order: Patna HC

Blog , , , ,

Title: Binesh Paswan v The State Of Bihar

Citation: CR. MISC. No.21466 of 2023

Decided On; 16-10-2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh

Introduction:

The petitioners have put to challenge in the present application filed under section 482 of the CrPC, the order dated 20.11.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Biharsharif, whereby he has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 307, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Facts:

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in the FIR, nothing specific has been attributed against these petitioners. It has further been submitted that, even if, the allegations made in the FIR are taken to be true at their face value they do not prima facie constitute any offence against the petitioners.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

On reading of the FIR, it transpires that according to the allegation, the occurrence had taken place during the course of construction of a house. There is specific allegation in the FIR of assault made by the accused persons because of which the mother of the informant sustained injuries. The submission on behalf of the petitioners that no offence is made out based on what has been alleged in the FIR, court decided that it is untenable. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

 

0

Court Need Not To Intervene Where It Doesn’t Seem Fit To Intervene: Patna High Court

Blog , , , ,

Citation: CR. MISC. No.21192 of 202

Decided On: 16-10-2023

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh

Introduction:

The petitioner has put to challenge in the present application filed under section 482 of the CrPC, the order dated 31.01.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No. 171 of 2021. The petitioner is an accused in Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 222 of 2019, wherein cognizance has been taken by the learned CJM, Darbhanga for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code

Facts:

The said criminal revision petition has been dismissed by an order dated 31.01.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-X, Drabhanga, which order is under challenge in the present application filed under section 482 of the CrPC. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner and other persons named in the FIR have been falsely implicated. The occurrence is said to have taken place as the informant had opened a shop to sell beef near a Temple and Town Primary Health Centre, Urdu Bazar, Darbhanga, to which members of both community opposed.

He further submits that the FIR was registered by the petitioner giving rise to Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 193 of 2019. Another FIR was registered by the petitioner’s wife on 08.06.2019 giving rise to Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 220 of 2019. Subsequently, the informant of this case lodged the false case giving rise to Laheriasarai P.S. Case No. 222 of 2019. On perusal of the records, it transpires that the petitioner had approached the revisional court and had invoked the statutory remedy of revision as envisaged under section 397 of the CrPC questioning the order taking cognizance.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

Court did not interfere with the order passed by the revisional court in the present case, cause the court didn’t find it fit to do so. The application was dismissed because of the said reason by the court. The Hon’ble judge added that the petitioner, however, shall be at liberty to raise the grounds, which he has raised in the present application, at the time of framing of charge.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By : Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement 

0
hc patna

A Order Has To Be Set Aside If It Goes Against The Principle Of Natural Justice: Patna High Court

Blog , , , ,

Citation: CWJC No.4833 of 2020

Decided On: 16-10-2023

Coram: Honourable The Chief Justice And Honourable Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy

Introduction:

The petitioner is aggrieved with the proceedings taken by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(4), Patna. Notice dated 24.09.2018 is issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as against the assessee, who is assigned to the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Jamshedpur. Admittedly, the assessee is assigned to Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Jamshedpur before which Officer, she also filed the Income Tax returns for the Assessment year 2016- 17, as is evident from. No further proceedings were taken by the Assessing Officer, who was the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Jamshedpur.

Facts:

The petitioner was then issued with notice dated 24.09.2018, in reply to which the petitioner specifically filed response dated 01.03.2019, along with supplementary counter affidavit. The petitioner questioned the jurisdiction and raised specific contentions against the allegations in the notice under Section 148. The petitioner specifically pointed out that there could be no proceedings taken by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(4) Patna.

The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department referred to Section 124(3) and also the consolidation of matters done by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range – 6, Patna, who has overall jurisdiction of State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand. It is also specifically pointed out that the land, subject to a development agreement, based on which the notice was issued under Section 148 was located within the State of Bihar.

The Joint Commissioner seems to have transferred the file of the Assessee to the Income Tax Officer Ward 6(4) Patna, on the ground that the property in relation to which the addition is threatened, was located within the State of Bihar, that too inside the boundaries of Patna. Court, specifically noticed that Section 127 which clothes the Principal Director General, Director General, the Principal Chief Commissioner, Chief Commissioner or Commissioner to transfer any case from one or more Assessing Officers sub- ordinate to him, whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers also sub- ordinate to him. However, the specific mandate in Section 127 is that the Assessee should be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter wherever it is possible to do so.

Court’s Analysis and Judgement:

There is no circumstance brought on record which made the extension of such an opportunity, which is also the statutory mandate, to be impossible in the facts of the present case. Obviously, the transfer was done behind the back of the petitioner. Court found no reason to uphold the order of assessment, which was passed pursuant to a notice issued on the wrong premise of a transfer made by the Commissioner without following the principles of natural justice, which is specifically made a mandate in the provision enabling such transfer. Hence, the assessment order passed and find the notice was set aside.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

1 2