Patna High Court
Renu Devi @ Renu Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 22 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74349 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2020 Thana- DEEPNAGAR District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Renu Devi @ Renu Kumari Wife of Birendra Paswan @ Biren Paswan
Resident of Vill- Sarvoday Nagar, P.S.- Deepnagar, Dist.- Nalanda
2. Richa Arya @ Riya Kumari @ Richa Kumari D/O Birendra Paswan @
Biren Paswan Resident of Vill- Sarvoday Nagar, P.S.- Deepnagar, Dist.-
Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Prabhuwan Prasad Son of Late Ram Ashish Prasad R/O Vill.- Lakhibagh,
P.S.- Masaudhi, Dist.- Nalanda.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar Rajesh, Advocate
Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Advocate
Mr. Jeet Kishore Mahto, Advocate
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Binod Murari Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-08-2025
Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Rajesh, the learned counsel for the
petitioners, Mr Binod Murari Mishra, the learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh-1, the learned A.P.P. for
the State.
2. The present application has been filed against the order
dated 13.09.2024 passed by learned C.J.M., Nalanda at Biharsharif
in Deepnagar P.S. Case No. 338 of 2022 (G.R. No. 1005424/2020)
whereby cognizance under Sections 302, 120(B) and 34 of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74349 of 2024 dt.08-08-2025
I.P.C. has been taken against the petitioners upon submission of
supplementary charge-sheet.
3. The present application has arisen out of Deepnagar
P.S. Case No. 338 of 2020 which was lodged by one Prabhuwan
Prasad alleging therein that the marriage of the informant's third
daughter, Neha Kumari was solemnized in the year 2010 with one
Ravi Kumar. It is further alleged that on 02.10.2020 the mobile
phone of the daughter and son-in-law of the informant were found
to be switched off and on suspicion, the informant arrived at the
house of his daughter and found the door locked and foul smell was
coming out from the locked room. The informant further alleged
that on suspicion, the police was informed, who came and broke the
lock and it was found that the informant's daughter, Neha Kumari,
son-in-law, Ravi Kumar and granddaughter Jenni and grandson
Ahan were lying dead. The informant suspected that the named
accused persons including the petitioners were behind the
conspiracy in killing them all.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
initially one Devnand Paswan had come forward stating therein that
five named accused persons were seen entering the house of the
deceased and they had also threatened him not to disclose anything.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74349 of 2024 dt.08-08-2025
It is further submitted that the police arrested the said five accused
persons and recorded their confessional statements and even in their
confessional statements, the name of the petitioners did not surface
and subsequently charge-sheet was submitted against the five
accused persons and supplementary investigation was kept pending
against the present petitioners and others. The learned counsel next
submits that the trial against those five accused persons proceeded
and they have been convicted in this case, however, the police upon
further investigation submitted a supplementary charge-sheet no.
404/2022 against the present petitioners for offences under Sections
302, 120B, 34 of the I.P.C.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that even
during the course of supplementary investigation, no evidence has
come against the present petitioners and it was only on suspicion,
the petitioners have been roped in and it is settled principle of law
that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the shape of evidence.
Learned counsel has submitted that the deceased was own brother
of petitioner no. 1 and maternal uncle (mama) of petitioner no. 2
and there has been no motive against the petitioners alleged by the
informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74349 of 2024 dt.08-08-2025
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits
that from perusal of the impugned order dated 13.09.2024, it would
be evident that the order is cryptic, in view of the fact that no
reference of any evidence has been given by the learned Court
below while taking cognizance. It is further submitted that in fact
from the last paragraph, it is clear that no order was passed taking
cognizance and no notice had been issued as contemplated under
Section 190 of Cr.P.C., i.e., 210 of B.N.S.S. It is further submitted
by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order
does not contain the details of the materials which has been
collected by the police during the course of investigation in order to
find prima facie case against the petitioners and hence the order is
illegal and fit to be a set aside.
7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant has opposed the present application and has stated that
the order taking cognizance is speaking and well detailed order
which can be found from perusal of the second paragraph of the last
page of the impugned order where the learned Court below has
taken into account the supplementary charge-sheet and the
supplementary case diary into account prior to holding that there
was prima facie evidence to take cognizance against the petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74349 of 2024 dt.08-08-2025
8. The learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has stated that
the present application is completely misconceived and there is no
illegality in the order taking cognizance and therefore, the present
application is fit to be dismissed.
9. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
respective parties and going through the impugned order, it is
evident that the learned Court below has taken into account the case
diary as well as the supplementary charge-sheet into account and
has held that there is enough evidence to take cognizance against
the petitioners and therefore summons were issued against them.
10. It is a well settled law that at the time of taking
cognizance, a prima facie case has to be made out and from perusal
of the charge-sheet, which has been brought on record by way of
Annexure-P/2, it is clear that the police has recorded that on the
statement of the informant and other witnesses examined there is
enough evidence for submission of charge-sheet against the
petitioners and therefore there is no occasion for this Court to
interfere, where a prima facie case is being made out on account of
the evidence which has been collected during the course of
investigation. The learned counsel has not been able to show as to
whether there is any evidence contrary to what has been found by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74349 of 2024 dt.08-08-2025
the police which has been recorded in the charge-sheet and
therefore, this Court finds that the order impugned does not need
any interference.
11. In view of the aforesaid, the present application is
dismissed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Siwani/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 08.08.2025
Uploading Date 22.08.2025
Transmission Date 22.08.2025
