1. Ravindra Kumar Singh @ Ravindra Singh, aged about 62 years 2. Mahendra Kumar v. …
Case Details
1 Cr.M.P. No. 972 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 972 of 2021 1. Ravindra Kumar Singh @ Ravindra Singh, aged about 62 years 2. Mahendra Kumar Singh @ Mahendra Singh, aged about 56 years 3. Bajrang Kumar Singh @ Bajrang Singh @ Bajrangi Singh, aged about 51 years 4. Naresh Kumar Singh @ Naresh Singh, aged about 48 years, all sons of late Khublal Singh, residents of village- Gumo, near Mahto Ahara, P.O. & P.S.- Telaiya, District- Koderma The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Party Versus …... Petitioners For the Petitioner For the State For the O.P. no. 2
Legal Reasoning
and after investigation of the case, the police found the prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120B of IPC and consequent upon the same, learned C.J.M., Koderma found prima facie, for the said offences and took cognizance of the said offences and ordered for issuance of summons to the petitioners. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. The father of the petitioners was enjoying peaceful possession of the land in question. It is further submitted that no specific date of the occurrence has been mentioned and the dispute between the parties is essentially a civil dispute. It is further submitted that though in the cognizance order, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma has mentioned that in finding the prima facie case, he has also referred to para 40, and 41 of the case diary, but it would be apparent that statement of the independent witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that the land was jointly settled in the name of the Khublal Singh and Lalo Singh though Khublal Singh was 8 years of age but Lalo Singh was major at the time of said Hukumnama being executed jointly in favour of Lalo Singh through Khublal Singh. It is further submitted that since revenue officials have intimated that no record of volume 4 is available, relating to the mutation of the name of the father of the petitioners, in respect of the land claimed by the informant, hence it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Telaiya P.S. case no. 50 of 2019 corresponding to the G.R. No. 261 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 09.03.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma be quashed. 5. Learned Addl. PP and learned senior counsel for the O.P. No. 2 on the other hand, vehemently oppose the prayer for quashing 3 Cr.M.P. No. 972 of 2021 entire criminal proceeding arising out of Telaiya P.S. case no. 50 of 2019 corresponding to the G.R. No. 261 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 09.03.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma and submits that claim of the petitioners is absurd to the extent that it indicates forging of the documents which is evident from the mere fact that the petitioners claim that his father obtained the Hukumnama in respect of the land of the informant in the year 1946 but the facts remains that since the father of the petitioner was only of 8 years of age in the year 1946, it is absurd that such a boy of 8 years old, could have taken land on Hukumnama, even jointly with someone. So the very basis of the case of the petitioners to establish a semblance of ownership over the land of the informant, is out and out false and fabricated and is the outcome of a fraudulent imagination, hence, the police during investigation found the petitioners having committed the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120B of IPC and learned Magistrate has rightly taken the cognizance of the said offences, hence, it is submitted that the criminal miscellaneous being without any merit be dismissed. 6. Having heard the submissions made at the bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having committed cheating, forgery of documents in respect to the land of the informant and also committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and used the forged documents as genuine to cheat the informant by inducing him to pay Rs. 5,00,000/- punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code; as also criminally intimidating the petitioner, punishable under Section 506 IPC in criminal conspiracy with each other under which is punishable under Section 120B of IPC. 7. It is a settled principle of law that the defence of the petitioner and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused, cannot be considered in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the High Court, as that would be job of the trial court, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State 4 Cr.M.P. No. 972 of 2021 of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Ors. reported in 2004 2 Supreme 501. 8. It is also a settled principle of law that in exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC, the genuine prosecution cannot be stifled as has been held in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr. )and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594 reiterated the settled principle of law that no mini trial can be conducted by the high court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the relevant portion of which reads as under :- “ Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering. (Emphasis supplied) 10. In view of the discussions made above, this court is of the considered view that this is not a fit a case, where the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Telaiya P.S. case no. 50 of 2019 corresponding to the G.R. No. 261 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 09.03.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma be quashed. 11. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition being without any merit is dismissed. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 15th June, 2023 Smita /AFR (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Arguments
: Mr. Sachin Mahto, Adv.. : Ms. Niki Sinha, Spl.PP : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv. P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Telaiya P.S. case no. 50 of 2019 corresponding to the G.R. No. 261 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 09.03.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma for having committed offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120B of IPC. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners committed forgery of documents in respect to the land of the informant and also committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and used the forged documents as genuine to cheat the informant by inducing him to pay Rs. 5,00,000/- to vacate the land of the 2 Cr.M.P. No. 972 of 2021 petitioners in criminal conspiracy with each other. On the basis of the FIR, which is supported by the letters submitted by the C.O. Koderma to the officer-in-charge Telaiya police station, the case was registered. The police took up the investigation of the case,