Pappu Thakur vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 974 Patna

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL REVISION No.448 of 2017
 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2013 Thana- BITHAN BAZAR District- Samastipur
======================================================

Pappu Thakur son of Shree Lakshmi Thakur, resident of Village- Belahi, P.S.- Bithan, District- Samastipur Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mira Kumari, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Anant Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-03-2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned counsel for the State.

The present Cr. Revision has been filed to set aside

the order dated 08.03.2017 passed in Bithan P.S. Case No. 99 of

2013 (G.R. No. 833/13 - T.R. No. 149 of 2017), under Section

239 of Code of Criminal Procedure by which the learned

magistrate refused to discharge the accused petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

was accused of Bithan P.S. Case No. 99 of 2013 lodged under

section 365/366/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in which the

informant was the father of the victim.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that after

completion of investigation final report has been submitted by

the police against the petitioner under Section 494 of the I.P.C.,

cognizance was also taken in the said provision.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the conjoint Patna High Court CR. REV. No.448 of 2017 dt.14-03-2023

reading under Section 494 of the I.P.C. read with Section 198(1)

&(2) of Cr.P.C., it transpires that for the purpose of constitution

of offence under Section 494 of the I.P.C., ingredient of the

section is not available, due to two reasons.

Firstly, the petitioner has not entered into second

marriage and secondly, that it is not the husband of the woman,

who is aggrieved here, rather informant is the father.

Counsel for the State admits that there is no

ingredient under Section 494 of the I.P.C. present in this case.

In the present facts and circumstances, let the order dated

08.03.2017, is hereby set-aside.

The Court below is directed to pass order afresh on

the discharge petition considering the ingredients under Section

494 of the I.P.C. and 198(2) of the Cr.P.C. He is also directed to

pass a reasoned order within a period of two weeks from the

date of production of the order.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ashishsingh/-

AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date