Jagdish Pandit and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and anr

Jagdish Pandit and ors. vs The State of Bihar and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 19, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/975250

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/975250
Court: Patna High Court
Decided On: May 19, 2012
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jagdish Pandit and ors.

Respondent

The State of Bihar and anr

Excerpt

.....counsel for parties. the petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3.11.2011 passed in complaint case no. c-784 of 2011 whereby sri rajeev kumar, judicial magistrate 1st class, has been pleased to take cognizance of the offence punishable under sections 406, 120-b and 506 of the indian penal code against the petitioner. learned counsel with reference to paragraphs 10 and 11 of the complaint submits that for resolving a dispute which is purely of a civil nature the instant criminal case has been maliciously instituted. it is contended that whereas the complainant is aggrieved by the action of the accused no.8 namely, brahmdeo singh who happens to be the vendor of the plot and who not only sold the plot in question in favour of the complainant on 08.01.2002 but also sold the same in favour of the present petitioners on 3.05.2002, has instituted the case in question by dragging the petitioners also. learned counsel submits that following the sale deed executed by the vendor, brahmdeo singh, in favour of the petitioner no.1, jagdish pandit an application was filed before the deputy collector, land reforms, bhagalpur for mutation of the name of the petitioner no.1 in the revenue records bearing jamabandi case no. 25 of 2006 and which after being contested patna high court cr.misc. no.730 of 2012 (2) dt.19-01-2012 was decided in favour of the wife of the complainant. although a title suit was filed by the petitioner no.1 giving rise to title suit no.2 of 2007 on the issue which stood dismissed for non prosecution on 26.03.2009 but a restoration application bearing misc. case no.9 of 2009 has been filed and which is still pending. he thus submits that the dispute being civil in nature the continuation of the criminal proceedings is an abuse of the process of the court. issue notice to the opposite party no. 2 under ordinary process as well as registered cover for which requisites etc. may be filed within one week, failing which this application as against the.....

Full Judgment

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.730 of 2012 (2) dt.19-01-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.730 of 2012 ====================================================== Jagdish Pandit & Ors. .... .... Petitioners Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr. .... .... Opposite Partie”

19. 01-2012 Heard learned counsel for parties. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3.11.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. C-784 of 2011 whereby Sri Rajeev Kumar, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, has been pleased to take cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 406, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. Learned counsel with reference to paragraphs 10 and 11 of the complaint submits that for resolving a dispute which is purely of a civil nature the instant criminal case has been maliciously instituted. It is contended that whereas the complainant is aggrieved by the action of the accused No.8 namely, Brahmdeo Singh who happens to be the vendor of the plot and who not only sold the plot in question in favour of the complainant on 08.01.2002 but also sold the same in favour of the present petitioners on 3.05.2002, has instituted the case in question by dragging the petitioners also. Learned counsel submits that following the sale deed executed by the vendor, Brahmdeo Singh, in favour of the petitioner No.1, Jagdish Pandit an application was filed before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Bhagalpur for mutation of the name of the petitioner No.1 in the revenue records bearing Jamabandi Case No. 25 of 2006 and which after being contested Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.730 of 2012 (2) dt.19-01-2012 was decided in favour of the wife of the complainant. Although a title suit was filed by the petitioner No.1 giving rise to Title Suit No.2 of 2007 on the issue which stood dismissed for non prosecution on 26.03.2009 but a restoration application bearing Misc. Case No.9 of 2009 has been filed and which is still pending. He thus submits that the dispute being civil in nature the continuation of the criminal proceedings is an abuse of the process of the Court. Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2 under ordinary process as well as registered cover for which requisites etc. may be filed within one week, failing which this application as against the concerned opposite party No.2 shall stand dismissed. Put up this case after service of notice. In the meantime, further proceedings in the Complaint Case No. C- 784 of 2011 pending in the Court of Sri Rajeev Kumar, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhagalpur shall remain stayed. (Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash

Same Court & Year Patna · 2012 Same Parties Jagdish Pandit and ors. vs The State of Bihar and anr Same Subject Land Acquisition