The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015 ---- Gulam Kudus Rai @ Kudus Rai -- Versus -- .... Petitioner 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Quresha Khatoon .... Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- For the Petitioner :- For the State For the OP no.2 :- :-
Legal Reasoning
protest petition, however, what are the prima facie materials before the learned Court is not disclosed in the order taking cognizance. By way of drawing the attention of the Court to Annexure-7 brought by way of the supplementary affidavit he submits that on 21.12.2011 the petitioner was busy with the last rites of the grand daughter of the petitioner and he was further engaged in that rituals till 23.12.2011 and the allegations are made that on 23.12.2011 the said act was done by this petitioner which is beyond imagination. He further draws the attention of the Court to Annexure 5 brought by way of the supplementary affidavit and submits that the entire village including the women committee have submitted petition before the officer in-charge, Pithoria under their signature saying that the informant has falsely implicated this petitioner in the false case. On this ground, he submits that entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed. He submits that all these documents were considered by the police and thereafter the final form was submitted. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State by referring the counter affidavit submit that the police has submitted the final form saying that falsely this case has been lodged. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the Informant submits that the learned -3- Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015 Court has rightly taken the cognizance as the case is made out and this Court may not interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage. 8. It is an admitted position that the complaint case has initially been filed by complainant which was sent by the learned Court under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and pursuant to that, Pithoria case was registered which was investigated by the police and the police has submitted the final form saying the case is false and there is lack of evidence. The document brought on the record by way of supplementary affidavit further suggests that the case has been falsely lodged against the petitioner. Annexure 5 is a document signed by the villagers as well as the women committee to the Officer In-charge, Pithoria saying that the petitioner has been falsely implicated by the complainant. Annexure 7 is a document to suggest that the grand daughter of the petitioner has died on 21.12.2011 and on that date he was busy on the rituals and the said rituals continued till 23.12.2011 and the alleged date of occurrence is said to be 23.12.2011. In this background, it appears that falsely the present case has been lodged against the petitioner which was investigated by the police and the final form was submitted saying falsely the present case has been lodged. However, the learned Court has been pleased to take cognizance under Section 376 of the IPC. 9. In the order taking cognizance, the learned Court has not disclosed what was the prima facie materials against the petitioner and no reason has been assigned to differ with the final form. There is no doubt that the detailed order is not required at the time of taking cognizance further if such a situation is there in the form of the final form at least prima facie materials are required to be disclosed in the order taking cognizance which is lacking the case in hand. Further if the case is maliciously filed all precaution is being taken by the accused so that the ingredients of those sections may be made out and if such -4- Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015 a situation is there, the Court is having a more responsibility and require to read the things in between the line, so that a malicious prosecution may not be there against anybody. 10. In view of the above facts, reasons and analysis, the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 08.08.2013 arising out of Pithoria P.S. Case No.19/2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.889/2012 pending in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi are quashed. 11.
Arguments
Mr. Sameer Sourabh, Advocate Mrs. Divya, Advocate Mr. Achinto Sen, APP Mr. Nandan Kumar, Advocate ---- 09/02.04.2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent State and the learned counsel for the Opposite Party no.2. 2. This petition is filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 08.08.2013 arising out of Pithoria P.S. Case No.19/2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.889/2012 pending in the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complaint case was filed which is numbered as C.P. Case No.132/2012 and the said was referred by the learned Court under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and pursuant to that, Pithoria P.S. case was registered. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the same case was investigated by the police and the final form was submitted saying the case has been falsely lodged against the petitioner and the case was said to be lack of evidence and the said final form was submitted on 26.03.2012. He submits thereafter complaint-cum-protest petition was filed alleging therein: -1- Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015 a. That on 23.12.2011 the complainant whose husband Akil Rai was in custody since 30.11.2011 in connection with Pithoria P.S. Case No.84 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.5795 of 2011 was alone in her house with three small child. In the meantime, the accused came to the house of the complainant and sympathetically told that you are my daughter-in-law and your husband is in jail so I will help you by giving you money for your livelihood till your husband is released from jail and I will also spend money for release of your husband. b. It is further alleged that on the same day i.e. on 23.12.2011, the accused again came to the house of the complainant at about 8:00 PM and provided two thousand rupees to the complainant, which was refused by the complainant as she has sufficient money to maintain herself and her family and requested the accused to go from her house but the accused became serious and took out revolver and took the complainant inside the room and closed the room and committed rape upon the complainant. c. It is further alleged that the complainant started weeping then if she will disclose the things to any person she will be killed with her entire family as the accused is Ward Parshad and Up-Mukhiya. The complainant went to the Pithoria Police Station but no action was taken and thus she went to the office of senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi on 03.01.2012 but no action was taken. Thus, the complainant went to the office of Rural S.P. on 27.01.2012 but again no action was taken. Thus, lastly, she filed a complaint case before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate on 08.02.2012 which was referred to under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the Pithoria Police Station where Pithoria P.S. Case No.19 of 2012 dated 18.02.2012 was instituted and after investigation police submitted Final Form after recording the statement, her mother as well as her mother-in-law. -2- Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015 d. It is further alleged by the complainant that police was under influence with the accused person, who is very powerful political leader and being Parshad and also Up-Mukhiya. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was being a counsellor as well as up-mukhiya has not helped the husband of the O.P.No.2 when he was languishing in jail and on the other hand, he has helped the complainant to lodge case against her husband and as a mark of seeking revenge, the complainant lodged this false case. He further submits that the learned Court has been pleased to take cognizance on the said
Decision
This petition is allowed and disposed of. 12. Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/Sangam/ A.F.R. -5- Cr.M.P. No. 1171 of 2015