[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Ram Narayan Verma vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.500 of 2023
Arising out of PS. Case No.-687 Year-2011 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Ram Narayan Verma, Son of Yamuna Prasad Verma, R/o Mohalla- Maharaj-
ganj, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui
2. Vijay Kumar Verma @ Vijay Verma, Son of Parshuram Verma, R/A Palamu
Colony, Ranchi Road, P.S.- Gola, District- Ramgarh (Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Arun Sinha, Son of Sri Basudeo Sinha, R/o Chekpost, Chaas, P.S.- Chaas,
District- Bokaro, Jharkhand.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-03-2026
Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Harendra Prasad, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seek quashing of the order dated
11.11.2022
passed in Cr. Rev. No. 40 of 2022 by learned Addi-
tional Sessions Judge-IV, Jamui whereby it has dismissed Cr. Re-
vision as well as order dated 15.01.2022 passed by Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui in connection with Complaint
Case No. 687(c) of 2011whereby and whereunder discharge peti-
tion filed by the petitioners has been rejected for the offences un-
der Sections 323, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.500 of 2023 dt.10-03-2026
3. The prosecution case is that Arun Sinha filed a com-
plaint petition before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui
alleging therein that on 10.06.2011 at about 8 P.M. the petitioners
along with ten unknown persons having weapons broke the lock of
the shop and house which was closed and situated at Maharajganj
Bazar. They took away the documents and valuable articles of
worth Rs. 1, 80,000/- kept there. They also abused and assaulted
them. It is further alleged that the complainant and petitioners
were related to each other.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is
admitted fact that the petitioners and complainant are relative and
the petitioners are 'Mausera Brother, Mausera Brother-in-law
(Bahnoi) and his Mausi. The Mausi of the Complainant (Sharda
Devi) had filed a Probate Case No. 05 of 2008. In the opinion of
this Court this makes it clear that there is a civil dispute and the
criminal prosecution has been lodged in order to settle the civil
dispute between the parties. The same has been deprecated by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in number of cases.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for quashing of the impugned order and submitted that
quashing petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may not be main-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.500 of 2023 dt.10-03-2026
tainable since the revision has also been dismissed and prima facie
it is not feasible in the interest of justice.
6. In such view of the matter, the order dated 11.11.2022
passed in Cr. Rev. No. 40 of 2022 by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-IV, Jamui whereby it has dismissed Cr. Revision as well as
order dated 15.01.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magis-
trate, Jamui in connection with Complaint Case No. 687(c) of
2011 whereby and whereunder discharge petition filed by the peti-
tioners has been rejected is quashed and set aside so far as the peti-
tioners are concerned.
7. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.
(Ansul, J)
Vikash/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
