[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Raj Deep vs The State Of Bihar on 27 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80466 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2024 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
1. Raj Deep S/o Binod Kumar Raut R/o Village - Ambedkar Nagar, P.S -
Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad
2. Sagar Deep S/o Binod Kumar Raut R/o Village - Ambedkar Nagar, P.S -
Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad
3. Binod Kumar Raut S/o Late Ramnath Ram R/o Village - Ambedkar Nagar,
P.S - Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Amit Kumar S/o Mantu Das R/o Village - Ambedkar Nagar, P.S - Jehanabad,
District - Jehanabad
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-01-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Counsel appearing on behalf of O.P. No. 2. The State is
represented by the learned APP.
2. The present application has been preferred by the
petitioners challenging the order dated 15.09.205 passed in
Sessions Trial No. 445 of 2024, arising out of Jehanabad Town P.S.
Case No. 202 of 2024, by the learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge-II, Jehanabad.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
2/7
3. The facts giving rise to the present application to the
effect that O.P. No. 2 gave a fardbeyan before the Town Police
Station, Jehanabad alleging therein that while his father was
sleeping in the house, the petitioners entered his house variously
armed with lathi, danda, etc. and started assaulting his father who
received injuries and fell down. It is further alleged that the
informant with the help of others brought his father to the Sadar
Hospital, Jehanabad for treatment and during the course of
treatment he died on 11.03.2024.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that upon
submission of the charge-sheet the trial had proceeded after
framing of charge and between 22.10.2024 to 06.08.2025, seven
prosecution witnesses were examined. It has been submitted that
out of the aforesaid seven witnesses, P.W. 1 is the Doctor who
conducted the post-mortem of the dead body and P.W. 7 is the
Station House Officer, Jehanabad Town Police Station while P.W.
3 is the informant of the present case and P.Ws. 2, 4, 5 and 6 were
the interested witnesses.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
during the pendency of the Sessions Trial No. 445 of 2024, while
the defence witnesses were being examined, an application under
Section 233(3) of the Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
3/7
(defence) on 23.08.2025 in which a prayer was made to issue
notice to the Civil Surgeon, Jehanabad and SHO, Jehanabad Town
Police Station to produce the documents relating to the treatment
of the deceased and audio-video clips of Jehanabad Town Police
Station House dated 11.03.2024.
6. It has been submitted that the learned APP filed a
rejoinder praying for rejection of the said petition and the learned
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Jehanabad after hearing
the parties, rejected the application of the petitioners vide the
impugned order dated 23.08.2025 recording that the application
was filed by the defence only to delay the trial.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by the
impugned order, the learned trial court has erred in rejecting the
application of the petitioners as from the deposition of P.W. 5, it
would be clear that the deceased was in conscious mind during his
treatment, but his statement was not recorded and such fact can be
proved only from the prescriptions of the doctor and treatment
chart of the deceased register of Emergency No. 8870 dated
10.03.2024
. It is further submitted that the doctor of Sadar
Hospital, Jehanabad and SHO, Jehanabad Town Police Station are
also necessary to be issued directions to produce the documents in
order to do complete justice.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is
the specific case of the defence that the petitioners had not
assaulted upon the deceased and the injury sustained by the
deceased was on account of some other fact and the petitioners
have falsely been implicated in this case and therefore, the
aforesaid documents as prayed in the application was necessary for
fair and just trial.
9. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioners that the
rejection order shall cause irreperable loss to the petitioners as the
calling of the prescription as well as the audio-visual clips is
necessary for the disposal of the present case.
10. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has
submitted that the calling of such document at a belated stage has
rightly been dealt with by the learned trial court and the
application made by the petitioners was rightly rejected. It has
been submitted that the petition filed by the defence had no merit
and the same has been filed in vexatious manner only to prolong
the trial. It has been stated by the learned APP that sufficient
opportunity to cross-examine the informant, the I.O. and the doctor
of the case was availed by the defence and therefore, at such a
belated stage such application has no meaning and it amounts to
improving upon the case of the defence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
11. Learned APP for the State has further submitted that
calling for the audio-video footage of the police station concerned
for that specific date is also not feasible, as the incident had
occurred almost 1½ years ago and, therefore, until the same is
preserved procuring such footage was not possible. It has next
been submitted by the learned APP for the State that the defence
had enough opportunity to make such applications earlier and it
has nothing to do with the deposition of the various prosecution
witnesses and, therefore, the present application is misconceived
and fit to be dismissed.
12. Heard the parties and also perused the impugned
order and from perusal of the same, it is evident that the learned
trial court has recorded the fact that the doctor was cross-examined
as P.W. 1 and was also cross-examined at length by the defence. It
has further been observed by the learned trial court that from
perusal of the post-mortem report, which was marked as P-1/P.W.-
1 shows the internal injuries inside the body of the deceased which
were found to be as follows:
Abdominal dissection:-
(I) Massive amount of blood oozes
(II) Spleen rupture
(III) Abdominal tears
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
13. The learned trial court has referred to the opinion of
the doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem has specifically
stated that "Hypovolemic Shock leading to cardio respiratory
arrest due to abdominal trauma and spleenic".
14. From the perusal of the aforesaid, it is evident that
the prayer made by the petitioners before the learned trial court
relates to the prescription of the deceased, who is said to have died
on 11.03.2024, while the incident had taken place on 10.03.2024 in
the evening. It is a settled law that applications calling for any
document or any material proof has to be called at the first
instance especially for the fact that the same relates to a medical
prescription of the deceased which was given to the informant,
while he was alive and admitted at Sadar, Hospital, Jehanabad.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioners it seems, relies
upon the deposition of certain witnesses who had stated about the
treatment paper but the same is not on record. It goes without
saying that if a document which ought to have been brought at the
first instance and was not brought by the prosecution during the
course of investigation the same in any case is not going to help
either the prosecution or the defence side. Neither the prosecution
could rely on such documents nor the same could be of any harm
to the defence side. As far as the collection of audio-video clips of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80466 of 2025 dt.27-01-2026
the police station is concerned, such evidence could have been
called by the defence way earlier, however the defence waited for
the entire prosecution witnesses to be examined and only at the
stage of examination of the defence witnesses that the present
application was filed by the petitioners before the learned trial
court.
16. In view of the discussions made, hereinabove, I do
not find any strong reason in the application by the petitioners
showing serious prejudice being caused to the defence and,
therefore, the present application is misconceived and is fit to be
dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 30.01.2026
Transmission Date 30.01.2026
