Patna High Court
Jitendra Kumar Sah vs The State Of Bihar on 27 July, 2026
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 5081 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2017 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar Sah, Son of Hansnath Sah, Resident of Village- Ratanpura
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-07-2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. This is an application for quashing of the
order dated 06.12.2018 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-IV, Siwan in S.Tr.No. 575/2018, arising out
of Pachrukhi (Sarai) P.S. Case No. 285/17 dated 11.12.17
registered under Sections 413, 414, 467, 468, 471, 420,
120(B) of I.P.C., by which the petition filed on behalf of the
petitioner u/s 227 Cr.P.C. for discharge has been rejected
and directed to frame charge against the accused persons.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that S.I.
Rakesh Kumar Sharma, S.H.O. of Sarai O.P., Siwan got his
statement stating therein that on 11.12.2017 at about 5.30,
he received information that 8-10 persons are gathered with
two pickup van and Bolero vehicle, and talking about the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
2/8
purchase of the vehicles. The informant informed to the
senior police officials and entered Sanha in this regard and
on direction of the senior police officers, he along with other
police party reached at the aforesaid place and found two
pick up vans and two Bolero vehicles were stating there and
8-10 persons are talking to each other and after seeing the
police party, they trying to flee away, out of them, 7 persons
were apprehended and three persons were succeeded in fled
away, apprehended persons disclosed their names as Ram
Niwas Dubey, Mohan Kumar Sah, Manish Kumar, Jitendra
Kumar, Ranjit Kumar, Himanshu Kumar, Ajay Prasad. They
further disclosed the name of the persons, who fled away as
Prem Kumar, Birbal Singh, Subhash Kumar. Thereafter in
presence of two witnesses search was made and from
possession of them aforesaid vehicles along with mobile
phones are said to recovered, from papers of vehicles, the
recovered vehicles seems to be stolen property, accordingly
seizure list was prepared. On the basis of aforesaid
statement, a case was instituted against altogether 10
accused persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
3/8
4. After investigation, police submitted charge-
sheet vide charge-sheet no. 51 of 2018 dated 09.03.2018
against six accused persons namely, Ram Niwas Dubey,
Mohan Kumar Sah, Manish Kumar, Ranjit Kumar, Himanshu
Kumar and Ajay Prasad and also submitted charge-sheet
against four accused persons including this petitioner
keeping investigation open.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner that considering the material available on
record, despite the fact that investigation was open against
petitioner. Learned trial court took cognizance and
committed case to the court of Sessions for its trial and
disposal, wherein the petitioner filed petition under Section
227 of Cr.PC saying that proceeding is completely baseless
against him as no case is made out, but the same was
rejected through impugned order dated 06.12.2018 without
assigning any reason. It is further submitted that fact
categorically suggest that during raid, this petitioner along
with other co-accused persons were apprehended, with
vehicle bearing Registration No. BR-02GA-4255 and also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
4/8
one mobile phone of Samsung company. It is further
submitted that upon verification, the documents related with
vehicle and also its registration certificate was found genuine
and same was in the name of this petitioner. It is further
submitted that mobile phone which was seized from
petitioner belongs to him which was released in his favour
after verification of related documents by learned trial court.
It is further submitted that the rejoinder-cum-2nd counter
affidavit has filed by Superintendent of Police, Siwan dated
28.07.2023
categorically stated through its para 7 that the
vehicle in issue was registered in the name of this petitioner,
on the date of occurrence and during pendency, it was
transferred to one Ranjeet Kumar. It is further pointed out
that there is no allegation against the petitioner by any
private persons and merely on the basis of suspicion and out
of oblique motive, the present criminal case was lodged.
Highlighting the issue, it is pointed out by learned counsel
that other co-accused persons namely, Ram Niwas Dubey,
Mohan Kumar Sah and Ranjit Kumar were acquitted by the
learned trial court through its judgment dated 31.01.2022,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
5/8
as no prosecution witnesses were turned up despite of giving
several opportunities. It is further submitted that now
nothing survives in this case, even prosecution lost his
interest, which is apparent from the order dated
31.01.2022.
6. It is further argued that in view of all such
aforesaid facts, it can be said safely that no case is made
out against petitioner and therefore, the impugned order of
rejection regarding discharge petition is fit to be quashed/set
aside. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel
relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as
available through State of Haryana and Others vs.
Bhajan Lal and Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC
335.
7. It would be apposite to reproduce the para
102 of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan Lal
Case (supra), which reads as under:-
“102. In the backdrop of the
interpretation of the various
relevant provisions of the Code
under Chapter XIV and of the
principles of law enunciated by this
Court in a series of decisions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
6/8relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article
226 or the inherent powers under
Section 482 of the Code which we
have extracted and reproduced
above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of
illustration wherein such power
could be exercised either to prevent
abuse of the process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be
possible to lay down any precise,
clearly defined and sufficiently
channelised and inflexible guidelines
or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of
cases wherein such power should be
exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in
the first information report or the
complaint, even if they are taken at
their face value and accepted in
their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out
a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first
informant report and other
materials, if any, accompanying the
FIR do not disclose a cognizable
offence, justifying an investigation
by police officers under Section
156(1) of the Code except under an
order of a Magistrate within the
purview of Section 155(2) of the
Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted
allegations made in the FIR or
complaint and the evidence
collected in support of the same do
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
7/8not disclose the commission of nay
offence and make out a case against
the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the
FIR do not constitute a cognizable
offence but constitute only a non-
cognizable offence, no investigation
is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2)
of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in
the FIR or complaint are so absurd
and inherently improbable on the
basis of which no prudent persons
can ever reach a just conclusion
that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal
bar engrafted in any of the
provisions of the Code or the
concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to
the institution and continuance of
the proceedings and/or where there
is a specific provision in the Code or
the concerned Act, providing
efficacious redress for the grievance
of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is
manifestly attended with mala fide
and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior
motive for wreaking vengeance on
the accused and with a view to spite
him due to private and personal
grudge.”
8. Considering the aforesaid submissions as on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 5081 of 2019 dt.27-07-2026
8/8
date of lodging the FIR, the vehicle in issue was registered in
the name of this petitioner and furthermore, the mobile
phone was released in favour of this petitioner after due
verification, accordingly, nothing incriminating appears
against this petitioner as to proceed with any criminal case.
9. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and
in terms of guiding notes as available through para 1 and 3
of Bhajan Lal Case (supra), the impugned order dated
06.12.2018 as passed by Additional Sessions Judge-IV,
Siwan is hereby quashed/set aside with all its consequential
proceedings qua petitioner.
10. Accordingly, the present petition stands
allowed.
11. Let the copy of judgment be communicated
to the learned trial court forthwith, with TCR, if any.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Raushan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 27.07.2026 Transmission Date 27.07.2026
