Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18790 (JHR)

MANOJ KUMAR ALIAS MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CBI

Cr.Rev./658/2023 · 2026-07-03

Rajesh Shankar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:19500 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Revision No. 658 of 2023 --- Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Agarwal, son of Ram Chandra Agarwal, resident of Village Gola Road, Ramgarh Cantt, P.O.- Gola, P.S.- Ramgarh Cantt., District- Ramgarh … … Petitioner Versus Union of India through CBI …. … Opp. Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Deepak Bharti, C.G.C. Order No. 10 Dated: 03.07.2026 1. The present revision is directed against the order dated 27.04.2023 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I., Ranchi in R.C. Case No. 06(A)/2011-ACB-R, whereby the petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 262 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for his discharge from the case instituted for commission of offences alleged to have been committed under Sections 120(B)/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, has been rejected. 2. Mr. Deepak Bharti, learned C.G.C. appearing on behalf of the opposite party, on instruction, submits that pursuant to framing of charge against the petitioner, the trial has proceeded and at present, two prosecution witnesses have also been examined. Hence, the present revision has become infructuous. 3. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, 2026:JHHC:19500 2 though admits the fact that by now, two prosecution witnesses have already been examined by the trial court, yet submits that the present revision has not become infructuous. He however fairly submits that since the trial has already proceeded ahead, no useful purpose will be served in adjudicating the present criminal revision. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that pursuant to framing of charge against the petitioner, the trial has proceeded and two prosecution/charge-sheet witnesses have already been examined by now, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served in adjudicating the present criminal revision. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to take all possible points as raised in the present revision, at an appropriate stage of the trial. 5. The present Criminal Revision is, accordingly, disposed of. 6. I.A. No.12844 of 2025 also stands disposed of. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) July 3, 2026 Ritesh/ Uploaded on 04.07.2026