Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and anr

Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar vs The State of Bihar and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 13, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/974871

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/974871
Court: Patna High Court
Decided On: May 13, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar

Respondent

The State of Bihar and anr

Excerpt

.....and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state. this application has been filed for quashing the order dated 14.9.2011 passed in complaint case no.3390 of 2010/trial no.507 of 2011 by sri jitendra kumar judicial magistrate, gopalganj, whereby he has been pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under section 323 of the indian penal code and section 3(1) (x) of the scheduled castes/scheduled tribes prevention of atrocities act 1989, against the petitioner. learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the allegations set out in the complaint placed at annexure-1 of the application and the statement on oath made by the complainant placed on record by way of a supplementary affidavit filed today during the course of the proceeding submits that there is variance in the statement of the complainant himself, inasmuch as the statement on oath does not contain details of the intimidating language used by the 2 petitioner as stated in the complaint petition. he further submits that out of the two witnesses, mr. taukil ahmad is a hearsay witness and the other witness doma ram has not come forward to be examined. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter having been compromised an application to this effect has been filed along with the application for anticipatory bail filed before the district and sessions judge, gopalganj. issue notice to opposite party no.2 under ordinary process as well as under registered cover with a/d, for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week, failing which this application shall stand rejected without further reference to the bench. put up after service of notice. in the meantime, further proceedings in complaint case no.3390 of 2010/tr. no.507 of 2011 pending before sri jitendra kumar, judicial magistrate, gopalganj or the successor court shall remain stayed. (jyoti saran, j.) s.k.pathak/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.190 of 2012 Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr. ---------------------------------- 02- 13.1.2012 Heard Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 14.9.2011 passed in Complaint Case No.3390 of 2010/Trial No.507 of 2011 by Sri Jitendra Kumar Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, whereby he has been pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under section 323 of the Indian penal Code and section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act 1989, against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the allegations set out in the complaint placed at Annexure-1 of the application and the statement on oath made by the complainant placed on record by way of a supplementary affidavit filed today during the course of the proceeding submits that there is variance in the statement of the complainant himself, inasmuch as the statement on oath does not contain details of the intimidating language used by the 2 petitioner as stated in the complaint petition. He further submits that out of the two witnesses, Mr. Taukil Ahmad is a hearsay witness and the other witness Doma Ram has not come forward to be examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter having been compromised an application to this effect has been filed along with the application for anticipatory bail filed before the District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj. Issue notice to opposite party no.2 under ordinary process as well as under registered cover with A/D, for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week, failing which this application shall stand rejected without further reference to the Bench. Put up after service of notice. In the meantime, further proceedings in Complaint Case No.3390 of 2010/Tr. No.507 of 2011 pending before Sri Jitendra Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj or the successor court shall remain stayed. (Jyoti Saran, J.) S.K.Pathak/

Same Court & Year Patna · 2012 Same Parties Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar vs The State of Bihar and anr Same Subject Education