Narendra Kumar Srivastava v. The State of Jharkhand

1. Narendra Kumar Srivastava, s/o late Paras Prasad, aged about 55 years, residentof Vidyapati Nagar, Main Road, Baridih, PO Baridih, PS Sidgora, Dist. East Singhbhum, State Jharkhand

2. Surendra Srivastava @ Surendra Kumar Srivastava, s/o late Paras Prasad, aged about 50 years, resident of Shiv Bagan, 21/B, Agrico, PO Agrico, PS Sidgora, District East Singhbhum, State Jharkhand

3. Chhotu Srivastava @ Chottu Srivastava, s/o Surendra Kumar Srivastava, aged about 24 years, resident of Shiv Bagan, 21/B Agrico, PO Agrico, PS Sidgora, Dist. East Sinbhbhum, State Jharkhand

4. Nitesh Srivastava @ Nitesh, s/o Surendra Kumar Srivastava, aged about 24 years, resident of Shiv Bagan, 21/B, Agrico, PO Agrico, PS Sidgora, District East Singhbhum, State Jharkhand ….. Petitioners -- Versus --

The State of Jharkhand

Nilmani Khakha, w/o Rajendra Prasad, resident of Birsanagar Zone No.6 Near Golmuri Club Gitanjali Garden, PO and PS Birsanagar, District East Singhbhum State Jharkhand …... Opposite Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- ---- For the Petitioners :- Mr. P.A.N.Roy, Advocate For the O.P.no.2 :- Mr.Saurav Kumar, Advocate ---- 5/05.04.2022 This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Birsanagar (SC/ST) P.S.Case No.11/2018 dated

05.12.2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 31.01.2019, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Jamshedpur. Mr.Roy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that now the compromise has been taken place between the petitioners as well as the O.P.No.2. He further submits that the complaint 2 was filed maliciously and there were some dispute with regard to land of about 10 bighas between the petitioners and the O.P.No.2. He further submits that on merit also this case is fit to be allowed on behalf of the petitioners in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand”, (2020) 10 SCC 710. Paragraph no.19 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow: in a “19. This Court judgment reported as Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra issued certain directions in respect of investigations required to be conducted under the Act.

In a review filed by the Union against the said judgment, this Court in a judgment reported as Union of India v. State of Maharashtra reviewed the directions issued by this Court and held that if there is a false and unsubstantiated FIR, the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code can be invoked. The Court held as under: (Union of India case, SCC p. 797, para 52) “52. There is no presumption that the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes may misuse the provisions of law as a class and it is not resorted to by the members of the upper castes or the members of the elite class. For lodging a false report, it cannot be said that the caste of a person is the cause. It is due to the human failing and not due to the caste factor. Caste is not attributable to such an act. On the other hand, members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes due to backwardness hardly muster the courage to lodge even a first information report, much less, a false one.

In case it is found to be false/unsubstantiated, it may be due to the faulty investigation or for other various reasons including human failings irrespective of caste factor. There may be certain cases which may be false that can be a ground for interference by the Court, but the law cannot be changed due to such misuse. In such a situation, it can be taken care of in proceeding under Section 482 CrPC.” The learned counsel appearing for the O.P.No.2 also accepted that compromise has been taken place between the parties. I.A. No.7022 of 2021 has been filed and in the said I.A. there are separate affidavits on behalf of the O.P.No.2 as well as the petitioners. In view of the above facts and the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and looking to the 3 paragraph no.19 of the aforesaid judgment, prayer made in the petition is allowed. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Birsanagar (SC/ST) P.S.Case No.11/2018 dated 05.12.2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 31.01.2019, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Jamshedpur are hereby quashed so far as the petitioners are concerned. Cr.M.P. No.1210 of 2019 is allowed and disposed of. I.A. No.7022 of 2021 stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) SI/