{"id":243798,"date":"2011-09-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-09-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011"},"modified":"2017-07-24T01:22:44","modified_gmt":"2017-07-23T19:52:44","slug":"prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court – Orders<\/div>\n
Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011<\/div>\n
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n                                        Cr.Misc. No.14625 of 2009\n          1. Prasun Kumar Choudhary, S\/O-Hari Prasad Choudhary\n          2. Vijaya Jha @ Vijaya Rani, W\/O-Prasun Kumar Choudhary\n          Both resident of Mohalla-Professor Colony, Rangbhumi Maidan, P.S.- K. Hat,\n          District-Purnea, present address in premises of Mahila College, Purnea.\n          ..........................Petitioners\n                                                   Versus\n          1. The State of Bihar\n          2. Seema Devi, W\/O-Uday Shankar Prasad Singh, Mohalla-Prabhat Colony, P.S.-\n             K. Hat, District-Purnea .......Opposite Parties.\n                                                  -----------\n<\/pre>\n
                    For the Petitioners :- Mr. Sidharath Prasad (Adv.)
\n                   For the Respondent :-Mr. Ramakant Sharma (Sr. Adv.)
\n                                           Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh
\n                          For the State :- Mr. Kalyan Shankar (A.P.P.)<\/p>\n
05   06.09.2011                      Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as<\/p>\n
                     learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and also learned<\/p>\n
                     counsel for Opposite Party No. 2.\n<\/p>\n
                                     This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has<\/p>\n
                     been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who are accused in<\/p>\n
                     Complaint Case No. 1978 of 2008, for quashing order dated<\/p>\n
                     02.03.2009 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in above<\/p>\n
                     stated Complaint Case No. 1978 of 2008 (wrongly mentioned in<\/p>\n
                     first paragraph of the petition that the impugned order dated<\/p>\n
                     02.03.2009 has been passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea in<\/p>\n
                     K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of 2006). The learned Judicial<\/p>\n
                     Magistrate, Purnea has passed the impugned order dated<\/p>\n
                     02.03.2009 by which he having found prima facie case under<\/p>\n
                     Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners,<\/p>\n
                     ordered to issue notices to them to procure their attendance for<\/p>\n
                     facing trial.\n<\/p>\n
                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
               The brief fact, which lies to file this quashing<\/p>\n
petition, is that Opposite Party No. 2, namely, Seema Devi filed<\/p>\n
complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 1685 of 2006 in the<\/p>\n
court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea against the petitioners<\/p>\n
alleging therein that her husband, namely, Sri Uday Shankar Prasad<\/p>\n
Singh runs a school, namely, Mount Carmel English School at<\/p>\n
Prabhat Colony, Purnea. The petitioner no. 1, namely, Prasun<\/p>\n
Kumar Choudhary was working as principal of the said school<\/p>\n
since long back. Petitioner no. 1 wanted to purchase a piece of land<\/p>\n
for which he was in need of money and he demanded a sum of<\/p>\n
rupees two lacs as loan from the husband of Opposite Party No. 2<\/p>\n
and assured him that he will repay the loan by adjusting rupees<\/p>\n
four thousand per month from his salary and the rest amount will<\/p>\n
be paid by him by the end of the year 2005 after selling the lands at<\/p>\n
his native village. The petitioner no. 2 used to visit the petitioner<\/p>\n
no. 1 at the premises of above stated school. Since the husband of<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 had no bank account in his name and the<\/p>\n
bank account stood in the name of Opposite Party No. 2, the<\/p>\n
petitioners approached the Opposite Party No. 2 and made the<\/p>\n
above stated demand and also gave the above stated assurance to<\/p>\n
the Opposite Party No. 2. Subsequently, having trusted upon the<\/p>\n
petitioners, the Opposite Party No. 2 gave rupees one lac eighty<\/p>\n
thousand to petitioners on different dates. Further, the case of<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 is that she gave rupees one lac forty thousand<\/p>\n
through cheques to petitioner no. 1 on different dates whereas
\n                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
rupees forty thousand was paid by her in cash but after taking the<\/p>\n
above stated amount petitioner no. 1 stopped coming to the above<\/p>\n
stated school and thereafter, when Opposite Party No. 2 as well as<\/p>\n
her husband contacted the petitioner no. 1 at his resident and tried<\/p>\n
to know the reason of not coming to the school from petitioner no.<\/p>\n
1, he gave unsatisfactory answer and again when Opposite Party<\/p>\n
No. 2 and her husband demanded the above stated amount on<\/p>\n
several occasions, the petitioner no. 1 refused to repay the<\/p>\n
aforesaid amount and also misbehaved with them. The Opposite<\/p>\n
Party No. 2 along with her husband went to concerned police<\/p>\n
station on 30.07.2006 to lodge a report and narrated the above<\/p>\n
stated incident to Officer-in-Charge of concerned police station and<\/p>\n
on the request of Officer-in-Charge of concerned police station, the<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 gave her grievances in writing to the above<\/p>\n
stated police official but the above stated police official did not<\/p>\n
register any case against the petitioners and, thereafter, Opposite<\/p>\n
Party No. 2 filed above stated complaint case bearing Complaint<\/p>\n
Case No. 1685 of 2006.\n<\/p>\n
               Having receipt the above stated complaint case, the<\/p>\n
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea sent the aforesaid<\/p>\n
complaint petition to concerned police station under Section 156<\/p>\n
(3) of the Cr.P.C. for institution of first information report and<\/p>\n
investigation. The police registered K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of<\/p>\n
2006 for the offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian<\/p>\n
Penal Code on the basis of above stated complaint petition and
\n                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
investigated the matter. After due investigation, police submitted<\/p>\n
final form showing the accusation untrue and also prayed for<\/p>\n
initiation of proceeding under Sections 182 and 211 of the Indian<\/p>\n
Penal Code against Opposite Party No. 2.\n<\/p>\n
               It appears from certified copy of order sheets passed<\/p>\n
in K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. No.<\/p>\n
1891 of 2006 that Opposite Party No. 2 filed a protest petition<\/p>\n
against the investigation of police in the above stated police case.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, it appears from the order sheets of K. Hat P.S. Case<\/p>\n
No. 363 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. No. 1891 of 2006 that<\/p>\n
having receipt the final form, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate<\/p>\n
issued notice to Opposite Party No. 2 and subsequently, learned<\/p>\n
Chief Judicial Magistrate proceeded on protest petition treated it as<\/p>\n
complaint petition. Though, it is not clear from the record as to<\/p>\n
whether the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate accepted the final<\/p>\n
form of K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of 2006 as submitted by the<\/p>\n
police after due investigation or not but it appears to me that the<\/p>\n
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea proceeded on protest<\/p>\n
petition treating it as complaint petition after acceptance of final<\/p>\n
form submitted in K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of 2006. It further<\/p>\n
appears from the record that the aforesaid complaint case was<\/p>\n
transferred to the court of Judicial Magistrate, who conducted an<\/p>\n
enquiry and passed impugned order dated 02.03.2009 in the<\/p>\n
manner as stated above.\n<\/p>\n
               Notice was issued to Opposite Party No. 2 by this
\n                       5<\/span><\/p>\n
Court and she appeared before this Court by filing Vakalatnama<\/p>\n
through her learned counsel and subsequently, this Court admitted<\/p>\n
the present petition for hearing.\n<\/p>\n
               Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits<\/p>\n
that no case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made<\/p>\n
out because as per case of the Opposite Party No. 2, she had given<\/p>\n
the amount in question to the petitioners as loan and there was no<\/p>\n
intention of petitioners to cheat the Opposite Party No. 2 at the<\/p>\n
time of taking the above stated loan amount. It is further contended<\/p>\n
by him that there is noting on the entire record to show this fact<\/p>\n
that there was any intention of cheating from very inception of<\/p>\n
taking the loan and mere assurance given by the petitioners to<\/p>\n
return the amount in question does not constitute an offence under<\/p>\n
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. To fortify his contention, he<\/p>\n
relied upon a decision reported in 2007 (2) PLJR Page-219<\/p>\n
Subesh Kumar and Anr vs. State of Bihar and Anr in which this<\/p>\n
Court has observed that if there is no allegation against the accused<\/p>\n
that from very inception there was any intention on the part of the<\/p>\n
accused to cheat the complainant, mere simple allegation of<\/p>\n
assuring the complainant that alleged lended money would be<\/p>\n
returned by other co-accused does not constitute an offence under<\/p>\n
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code as there is complete lacking<\/p>\n
of important ingredients for making out prima facie case under<\/p>\n
Section 420 as well as 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Another<\/p>\n
decision cited by learned counsel for the petitioners is (2005) 13
\n                      6<\/span><\/p>\n
Supreme Court Cases 697 in which Hon’ble Apex Court of this<\/p>\n
country has held that in absence of any averments in the complaint<\/p>\n
so as to infer fraudulent or dishonest inducement having been made<\/p>\n
by the accused, pursuant to which the complaint parted with his<\/p>\n
money, it cannot be said that the accused had cheated the<\/p>\n
complainant.\n<\/p>\n
               It is further contended by him that as per case of<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2, she made payment of rupees one lac forty<\/p>\n
thousand to petitioners through cheques which had been issued by<\/p>\n
her on different dates but Annexure-4 to this petition reveals that<\/p>\n
all the five cheques were issued either in the name of husband of<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 or in favour of the complainant herself. So,<\/p>\n
the aforesaid materials clearly suggest that not a single cheque had<\/p>\n
been issued either in the name of petitioner no. 1 or in the name of<\/p>\n
petitioner no. 2.   It is further contended by him that in her<\/p>\n
complaint petition bearing Complaint Case No. 1685 of 2006, she<\/p>\n
has nowhere stated that the cash amount was paid to the petitioners<\/p>\n
in presence of any other person rather a vague statement in respect<\/p>\n
of payment of the alleged cash amount has been made by the<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 in her first complaint case bearing Complaint<\/p>\n
Case No. 1685 of 2006 but subsequently, in course of enquiry of<\/p>\n
Complaint Case No. 1978 of 2008, she as well as her witnesses<\/p>\n
developed the story and stated that the alleged cash amount was<\/p>\n
paid by the Opposite Party No. 2 in presence of witnesses, namely,<\/p>\n
Mahmoodul Hasan, Manoj Kumar, Ratnesh Kumar Jha and
\n                       7<\/span><\/p>\n
Ramchandra Jha       and, therefore, the aforesaid complaint case<\/p>\n
bearing Complaint Case No. 1978 of 2008 is nothing but only the<\/p>\n
abuse of process of the law.\n<\/p>\n
               On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 supported the impugned order and submitted<\/p>\n
that a prima facie case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code<\/p>\n
is made out against the petitioners because having taken the<\/p>\n
advantage of faith of the Opposite Party No. 2, the petitioners<\/p>\n
cheated her as well as her husband. It is further contended by him<\/p>\n
that though the complaint petition has been poorly drafted but the<\/p>\n
averments made in the complaint petition clearly constitute a prima<\/p>\n
facie case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and,<\/p>\n
therefore, the learned court below has not committed any illegality<\/p>\n
in the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n
               Certain facts are admitted between the parties. It is<\/p>\n
an admitted position that initially, Opposite Party No. 2 filed<\/p>\n
complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 1685 of 2006 which<\/p>\n
was converted into K. Hat P.S. Case No. 363 of 2006 and after due<\/p>\n
investigation, police submitted final form finding the accusation<\/p>\n
untrue and the Opposite Party No. 2 filed a protest petition against<\/p>\n
the investigation of the police and learned Judicial Magistrate,<\/p>\n
Purnea proceeded on the basis of aforesaid protest petition as<\/p>\n
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea treated the aforesaid<\/p>\n
protest petition as complaint petition.\n<\/p>\n
               It is the case of the Opposite Party No. 2 that
\n                       8<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner no. 1 had taken the alleged amount as loan and there is<\/p>\n
no averment in the complaint petition that at the time of taking the<\/p>\n
aforesaid loan there was intention of petitioner no. 1 to cheat the<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2. It is further case of Opposite Party No. 2 that<\/p>\n
first cheque was issued by her on 17.07.2004 whereas last cheque<\/p>\n
was issued on 09.07.2005. The aforesaid fact is evident from<\/p>\n
perusal of Annexure-4 to the petition. It is further case of the<\/p>\n
Opposite Party No. 2 that all the transactions took place between<\/p>\n
17.07.2004 to 09.07.2005. It is further case of Opposite Party No. 2<\/p>\n
that petitioner no. 1 had assured her to return the entire amount till<\/p>\n
the end of year 2005, if after deducting rupees four thousand per<\/p>\n
month from his salary, the loan amount is not adjusted. It is further<\/p>\n
case of the Opposite Party No. 2 that petitioner no. 1 stopped<\/p>\n
attending his duty after taking the loan amount. Annexure-4 to this<\/p>\n
petition reveals that allegedly, first cheque was issued by rupees<\/p>\n
fifty thousand. So, even if, the story of Opposite Party No. 2<\/p>\n
assumed to be true, then also, it is apparent that petitioner no. 1<\/p>\n
stopped attending his school after taking the aforesaid amount but<\/p>\n
in spite of that the rest cheques were issued because there is<\/p>\n
nothing on the entire record to show this fact that any deduction<\/p>\n
was made from the salary of the petitioner no. 1 after issuance of<\/p>\n
first cheque dated 17.07.2004. Apart from this, it would appear<\/p>\n
from Annexure-4 to this petition that almost all the cheques in<\/p>\n
question were either issued in the name of husband of Opposite<\/p>\n
Party No. 2 or in her name itself. So, the aforesaid fact also does
\n                                      9<\/span><\/p>\n
          not support the allegation levelled against the petitioners.<\/p>\n
          Moreover, the only allegation against petitioner no. 2 is that she<\/p>\n
          accompanied petitioner no. 1 at the time of taking amount in<\/p>\n
          question but the aforesaid fact has not been stated by the witnesses<\/p>\n
          in course of enquiry which is evident from perusal of Anneuxre-5<\/p>\n
          series to this petition.\n<\/p>\n
                          In the light of aforesaid discussions, I am of the<\/p>\n
          opinion that learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has<\/p>\n
          rightly submitted that no case under Section 420 of the Indian<\/p>\n
          Penal Code is made out even the averments of the complaint<\/p>\n
          petition and materials available on the record are taken into<\/p>\n
          consideration and the continuance of proceeding of Complaint<\/p>\n
          Case No. 1978 of 2008 is nothing but only the abuse of process of<\/p>\n
          the law.\n<\/p>\n
                          Thus, on the basis of reasons stated above, this<\/p>\n
          petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 02.03.2009<\/p>\n
          passed in Complaint Case No. 1978 of 2008 is, hereby, quashed.<\/p>\n
                          In the manner as stated above, this petition stands<\/p>\n
          disposed of.\n<\/p>\n
                         Let this order be communicated to the concerned<\/p>\n
          court for needful.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
SHAHZAD                                  ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court – Orders Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14625 of 2009 1. Prasun Kumar Choudhary, S\/O-Hari Prasad Choudhary 2. Vijaya Jha @ Vijaya Rani, W\/O-Prasun Kumar Choudhary Both resident of Mohalla-Professor Colony, Rangbhumi Maidan, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243798","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court-orders"],"yoast_head":"\nPrasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":2164,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court - Orders\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\",\"name\":\"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011"},"wordCount":2164,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court - Orders"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011","name":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-23T19:52:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prasun-kumar-choudhary-anr-vs-state-of-bihar-anr-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prasun Kumar Choudhary & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 6 September, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243798","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=243798"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243798\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243798"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243798"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243798"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}