Devanand vs The State Of Bihar on 27 April, 2026

    0
    26
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Devanand vs The State Of Bihar on 27 April, 2026

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21390 of 2021
                           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-1991 Thana- SIKANDRA District- Jamui
                      ======================================================
                      DEVANAND S/o Late Sant Lal Yadav Resident of Mohalla- East Nand Gola,
                      P.S.- Malsalami, District- Patna.
    
                                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                            Versus
                      THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR
    
                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                      ======================================================
                      Appearance :
                      For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Bhaskar Shankar, Adv.
                      For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.A.G
                      ======================================================
                      CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
                                            ORAL ORDER
    
    12   27-04-2026

    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

    Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. Petitioner seeks quashing for the entire proceedings

    dated 07.09.2020 passed in connection with Sikandara P.S. Case

    No. 143 of 1991 and supplementary charge sheet dated

    30.10.2019 by which the learned Sri Manish Kumar Pandey,

    Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamui has taken cognizance of the

    offence under Sections 420, 465, 467, 409, 406, 468 and 120B

    of the Indian Penal Code.

    3. The prosecution case as per the F.I.R. is that the

    petitioner was a Junior Engineer and he alleged that the

    petitioner made irregular payment of Rs. 80,000/- to the

    contractor Kamleshwari Prasad Yadav. The F.I.R. was insitituted

    on 08.09.1991. The case was transferred to C.I.D on 25.06.1993
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21390 of 2021(12) dt.27-04-2026
    2/3

    for investigation. Thereafter, vide order dated 18.09.2003 the

    case was again transferred to the concerned district police for

    investigation.

    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on

    14.02.2017, the petitioner filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.

    8958 of 2017 to quash the F.I.R. where the S.P. Jamui was

    directed to submit status report with regard to investigation.

    After the order was communicated to S.P. Jamui on 28.10.2019

    the Dy. S.P. Jamui has submitted his final progress report vide

    Memo No. 2888 dated 28.10.2019 where he recommended that

    supplementary charge sheet be filed against the petitioner and

    another person. On 30.10.2019 S.P. Jamui issued his report 5

    cum final order Memo No. 4906 where he directed the

    investigating officer to submit supplementary charge sheet

    against the petitioner and to obtain order for prosecution

    sanction.

    5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned

    Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently

    opposed quashing of the order of cognizance dated 07.09.2020.

    6. The story of this case shows absolute negligence

    and recklessness on the part of the prosecuting agency either

    C.I.D. or district police. The investigation was kept pending for
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21390 of 2021(12) dt.27-04-2026
    3/3

    29 years without any rhyme and reason and on prodding of this

    Court a report was submitted in hot haste and despite direction

    of the S.P. Jamui no prosecution sanction was obtained and the

    cognizance was taken without prosecution sanction. Apart from

    the monumental delay and negligence in prosecuting the case

    the case is also bad in law on the ground of not obtaining the

    sanction prior to cognizance.

    7. Consequently, entire case dated 07.09.2020 passed

    in connection with Sikandara P.S. Case No. 143 of 1991 against

    all the accused persons whether they are petitioners or not

    before this Court is hereby quashed so far as the petitioner is

    concerned.

    8. Accordingly, the present petition stands allowed.

    (Ansul, J)
    abhishekkr/-

    U      T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here