Patna High Court
Sudha Kumari @ Sudha Devi And Ors vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal ... on 1 December, 2023
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1749 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2017 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna
======================================================
1. Sudha Kumari @ Sudha Devi, Wife of Sharweshwar Kumar Sadanand,
2. Rohit Raj Son of Sharweshwar Kumar Sa0.danand,
3. Sharweshwar Kumar Sadanand @ Arvind Kumar, All Sons Of Shyam
Pandit, Resident Of 'VANI Nilaya' Shivpuri, Beur Road, Anishbad, P.O.-
Anishabad, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna- 800002.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home,
Government Of Bihar, Patna
2. The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sachivalya, Patna.
5. The Station House Officer, Gardanibagh, P.S. Gardanibagh, Patna.
6. The Investigating Officer, Gardanibagh, P.S. Gardanibagh, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Adv.
: Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Ajit Kumar, GA9
For the Respondent No.7 : Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Adv.
: Mr. Pramod Kumar, Sr. Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-12-2023
Learned Senior counsel Mr. P.N. Shahi, for the
petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent No.7 is
present.
2. The present writ application has been filed for
quashing of the F.I.R. being Gardanibag P.S. Case No. 192 of
2017 dated 25.03.2017 arising out of Complaint Case No.
703(c) of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1749 of 2017 dt.01-12-2023
Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 472 and 120B of the I.P.C..
3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the F.I.R. has been lodged in under Section 154(3) of the
Cr.P.C. as well as the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case
of Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in
(2015) 6 SCC 287 as well as the case of Babu Venkatesh &
Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka & Anr. reported in 2022
LiveLaw (SC) 181. Counsel for the petitioner submits that
certified copy of the F.I.R. has been annexed that the writ
petition and Paragraph-33 of the writ petition content the
statement of affidavit, but this affidavit paper has neither been
executed by the complainant nor there is any affidavit on the
same and it was referred for filing F.I.R. on the basis of which
the F.I.R. has been filed.
4. Learned senior counsel also submits that there is
no specific averment and in support of documents attached with
the complaint which shows that there is violation of Section
154(3) of the Cr.P.C. and as such this F.I.R. is not maintainable
and fit to be quashed.
5. Learned senior counsel on the other hand
submits that the content of prayer portion as well as the
statement laid down in Paragraph-15 of the writ petition, it has
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1749 of 2017 dt.01-12-2023
been clearly mentioned a statement by which it transpires that
the compliance of Section 154(3) of Cr.P.C. has been made.
6. Learned counsel admits that in the prayer
portion, the signature of the complainant is there, but in affidavit
portion, there is no signature. Counsel submits that he has filed
counter-affidavit and in Paragraph-46 of the counter-affdavit,
there is signature of the complainant on the affidavit. Counsel
has also annexed the copy of the receipts sent to the
Superintendent of Police, Patna by which he want to show that
the compliance of Section 154(3) of the Cr.P.C. has been made.
7. Upon perusal of the document, it transpires to
this Court that in the writ petition, the certified copy of the
F.I.R. has been attached and in the certified copy, the complaint
petition does not content duly affidavit which is in gross
violation of the cases decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e.,
Priyanka Srivastava & Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287 as well as the case of Babu
Venkatesh & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka & Anr. reported in
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 181 respectively where it has been
categorically hold that the application under Section 156(3) of
the Cr.P.C. on the basis of which the F.I.R. has to be allowed and
has to be supported in affidavit which is duly sworn by the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1749 of 2017 dt.01-12-2023
complainant, but the certified copy of the F.I.R. indicates that
there is deficiency in such affidavit. As such, this Court deems it
fit to quashed the present F.I.R..
8. In this view of the matter, the present F.I.R.
being Gardanibag P.S. Case No. 192 of 2017 dated 25.03.2017
arising out of Complaint Case No. 703(c) of 2017 is hereby
quashed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Prakashmani/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date
Transmission Date NA
