Patna High Court
Sobratan Khatoon vs The State Of Bihar on 29 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.724 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. SOBRATAN KHATOON Wife of Sarif Mian Resident of Village- Semari,
P.S.- Dawath, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
2. Ajmeri Begam @ Usha Khatoon Wife of Afzal Mian Resident of Village-
Semari, P.S.- Dawath, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
3. Md. Afzal Mian @ Md. Afzal Son of Sultan Mian Resident of Village-
Semari, P.S.- Dawath, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
4. Md. Sultan Son of Md. Hafiz Resident of Village- Shah Ke Barahari, P.S.-
Kargahar (Barahari), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
5. Md. Hafiz Son of Late Abdul Rahman Resident of Village- Shah Ke
Barahari, P.S.- Kargahar (Barahari), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
6. Wakil Alam Son of Late Rajak Khalifa Resident of Village- Shah Ke
Barahari, P.S.- Kargahar (Barahari), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
7. Nizamuddin Son of Mustakim Resident of Village- Nonsari, P.S.- Nokha
(Dharmpura), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
8. Md. Sabir Alam Son of Md. Sultan Resident of Village- Nonsari, P.S.-
Nokha (Dharmpura), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
9. Md. Aslam Son of Md. Haffij Resident of Village- Nonsari, P.S.- Nokha
(Dharmpura), District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. Majhar Alam Son of Kalamuddin Resident of Village- Semari, P.S.- Dawath,
District- Rohtas at Sasaram
3. Arman Hussain Son of Majhar Hussain Resident of Village- Semari, P.S.-
Dawath, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
4. Sadam Hussain Son of Majhar Hussain Resident of Village- Semari, P.S.-
Dawath, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ramchandra Singh, Adv.,
Mr. Shankar Kumar, Adv.,
Mr. Radha Krishna, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-01-2024
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.724 of 2019 dt.29-01-2024
Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners as well as
learned APP for the State.
2. The instant revisional application is barred by
limitation.
3. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
is taken up for hearing. It is stated by the petitioners that the
petitioners have filed the revisional application on 25 th June,
20019, challenging an order dated 16th January, 2019, passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Rohtas at Sasaram in
Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 2015.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the
petitioners applied for certified copy of the Judgment of Criminal
Appeal No. 40 of 2015, dated 16th January, 2019, on 30th January,
2019, but it was rejected on 19th February, 2019. Again requisites
for certified copy was filed on 8th April, 2019 and it was supplied
on 25th April, 2019. Similarly, the petitioners tried to obtain
certified copy of the order dated 5th February, 2015, passed by the
learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in Case
No. 479 (M) of 2014 in order to get the certified copy, there was
delay of about 60 days to file the instant revision.
5. Therefore, the petitioners have prayed for
condonation of delay in filing the instant revision.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.724 of 2019 dt.29-01-2024
6. I have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners.
On perusal of the petition, this Court finds that the petitioners have
been able to establish that they were prevented by sufficient cause
in filing the instant revision.
7. Accordingly, the delay in filing the instant revision is
condoned.
8. The revisional application is taken up for hearing on
the point of admission.
9. The instant revision is directed against an order of
dismissal of Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 2015, affirming an order
under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C., passed by the learned Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas in Case No. 479 of
2014 on 5th February, 2015, under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C.
10. By passing an order dated 5th February, 2015, the
learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bikramganj, Rohtas directed
the petitioners to deposit bond of good behaviour of Rs.25,000/-
each with sureties. The impugned order was assailed mainly on the
ground that as per the provision of Section 116 of the Cr.P.C.,
enquiry in a proceeding under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C. shall be
completed within a period of six months from the date of
commencement, and if such enquiry is not so completed, the
proceedings under Chapter-8 of the Cr.P.C. shall, on the expiry of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.724 of 2019 dt.29-01-2024
the said period, stand terminated unless, for special reasons to be
recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.
11. In the instant case proceeding under Section 107 of
the Cr.P.C. was initiated by the opposite party against the
petitioners on 5th July, 2014. The said proceeding was disposed of
vide order dated 5th February, 2015, that is after expiry of six
months. No special reason was granted by the learned Sub
Divisional Magistrate.
12. For the reasons stated above, the instant revision is
allowed.
13. The order passed in the proceeding under Section
107 of the Cr.P.C. and the impugned order dated 16.01.2019,
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 40 of 2015 are quashed and set
aside.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
pravinkumar/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
