The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3237 of 2017 ------ 1. Lallu Singh, S/o Late Sheo Shankar Singh, 2. Bindeswari Singh, S/o Late Sheo Shankar Singh, 3. Ashok Singh, S/o Bindeswari Singh, 4. Pramod Singh, S/o Bindeswari Singh, 5. Santosh Singh, S/o Bindeswari Singh, 6. Bimlesh Singh, S/o Lallu Singh, 7. Kamlesh Singh, S/o Lallu Singh, 8. Mithlesh Singh, S/o Lallu Singh, 9. Parmanand Singh, S/o Late Brijkishor Singh, 10. Anand Singh, S/o Brijkishor Singh All are R/o Village Chankar, Gopal, P.O.- Kamgarpur, P.S. Hussainabad, District- Palamau, State Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Yamuna Singh, S/o Ramdash Singh, R/o Village Chankar, Gopal, P.O.- Kamgarpur, P.S. Hussainabad, District- Palamau, State Jharkhand … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioners For the State For the O.P. No.2
Legal Reasoning
found prima facie case as already indicated above in the foregoing paragraph of the judgment is made out against the petitioners but the only contention of the petitioners is that the same are false and has been filed for wrecking vengeance. It is a settled principle of law that the veracity of the defence of the petitioners cannot be considered by holding a mini trial in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & 3 Cr. M.P. No.3237 of 2017 Another vs. Akhil Sharda & Others reported in (2022) LiveLaw SC 594, 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) 9. It is a settled principle of law that in exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the genuine prosecution cannot be stifled as has been held in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr.) & Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 10. Now coming to the facts of the case, as already indicated above, the allegations against the petitioners are sufficient to constitute the offences for which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj has found prima facie case. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to quash the same. Thus, there is no merit in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition. 11. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, is dismissed. 12. In view of the disposal of the instant Cr.M.P., interim relief granted earlier vide order dated 28.03.2018 stands vacated. 13. Registry is directed to intimate the court concerned forthwith. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 14th of August, 2024 AFR/ Saroj 4 Cr. M.P. No.3237 of 2017
Arguments
: Mr. Sheo Kr. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, Addl.P.P. : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Pd., Advocate ------ 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 the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the order dated 18.08.2017 passed by the learned 1 Cr. M.P. No.3237 of 2017 Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Complaint Case No.775 of 2014 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 147, 323, 387, 452, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and the said case is now pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that on 27.04.2014 at 10 AM while the complainant was in his house, all the accused persons came forming all in assembly with arms along with deadly weapons, they committed criminal trespass to the house of the complainant, after making preparation to assault the complainant and his family members and abducted the complainant and his son, and caused hurt to the son of the complainant namely Santosh Singh and assaulted him by injuring him and demanded extortion of Rs.4,00,000/-. 4. On the basis of the complaint, statement of solemn affirmation and the statement of enquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj has found prima facie case for the said offences and ordered for issuance of summons. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the complainant also filed a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Palamau which upon being enquired was found to be false. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 filed an application on 17.07.2017 before the Superintendent of Police, Palamau. There is a land disputed between the parties. The allegations against the petitioners are false. The proceeding under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal 2 Cr. M.P. No.3237 of 2017 Procedure was instituted vide Misc. Case No.184 of 2014. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 7. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition by the petitioners and submit that if the allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety, all the offences for which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj has found prima facie case is indisputably made out against the petitioners; hence, there is no justifiable reason to allow the prayer made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition by the petitioners. It is lastly submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 8. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the undisputed fact remains that if the allegations made in the complaint, the statement of solemn affirmation and the statement of enquiry witnesses are considered to be true in their entirety, then all the offences for which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj has