AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
14 paragraphs · 288 wordsPrashant Kumar, J.—This application has been filed for quashing of order dated 20-04-2009, in complaint case No. C/1-829/07, whereby
the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur concluded that there is sufficient material on record to frame charge against petitioner u/s
385/379 of the Indian Penal Code and directed him to appear on 15-5-2009 for framing of charge. Sri S.K. Sahay, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that petitioner has filed an application for discharge on 16-09-2008, but the learned court below without disposing the same had
come to the conclusion that there are sufficient materials available on record for framing of charge against petitioner under Sections 385 and 379 of
the Indian Penal Code.
From perusal of record it appears that on 20-04-2009, case was fixed for hearing on the point of charge. It also appears that on that day,
counsel for the accused appeared in the court below and after hearing both parties, learned court below considered complaint petition and
statement of witnesses recorded during examination of witnesses before charge and after considering the aforesaid evidence available on record
come to the conclusion that prima facie offence under Sections 385 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code are made out against petitioner. This shows
that learned court below had applied its mind on the materials available on record. Thus, in my view, he has impliedly rejected the application filed
by petitioner for his discharge. From perusal of complaint petition and other materials available in this record, I find that conclusion arrived by the
learned court below is legally correct and there is absolutely no illegality in it. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to interfere with
aforesaid impugned order. Hence, this application is dismissed.
