Odisha v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2289 of 2020 Bipul Sharma, aged about 29 years, son of Daya Shankar Sharma, resident of Saraswati Vihar, P.O. & P.S.-Ainthapali, Dist.-Sambalpur, State-Odisha .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioners For the State
Legal Reasoning
: Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, GA III ….. By the Court:- 1. 2. 3. 4. Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the FIR in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 44 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 269 and 270 of Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that investigation of the case is going on and charge sheet has not yet been submitted in this case. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the owner of two vehicles which were involved in transportation of pan masala. The Circle Officer, Bano sent a written report to the officer- in-charge of Bano police station directing him to register an FIR Cr.M.P. No.2289 of 2020 1 alleging commission of the offences under the appropriate provisions relating to Covid-19 Pandemic and to report to the circle officer and on the basis of the same the FIR has been registered. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused only for wreaking vengeance. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that so far as the offence punishable under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned; Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires a complaint to be filed in writing by the public servant concerned or any one superior to him alleging violation of his order but in this case, neither any order promulgated by any public servant has been alleged nor any such public servant has initiated the complaint and in the absence of the same, the offence punishable under Section 188 of Indian Penal Code is not made out. So far as the offence punishable under Section 269 of Indian Penal Code is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no allegation that the petitioner has done anything to spread infection of any disease which is dangerous to life hence, the offence punishable under Section 269 of Indian Penal Code is not made out and in the absence of any allegation that the petitioner was doing anything malignantly and also in absence of any allegation that the petitioner knew or had reason to believe that his act is likely to spread infection of any disease which is dangerous to life. It is next submitted that similarly, the offence punishable under Section 270 of Indian Penal Code is also not Cr.M.P. No.2289 of 2020 2 made out; against the petitioner, even if the entire allegations made against him, after considering to be true in their entirety. Hence, it is submitted that as none of the offences in respect of which the FIR has been registered is made out, the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 6. Learned Additional Advocate General-III on the other hand opposes the prayer as made by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that at subsequent stages the opposite party can come up with the exact offences committed by the petitioner. It is then submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General-III that the petitioner has violated the order of the government prohibiting transportation of pan masala of certain brand hence, the case has rightly been registered against them. It is therefore submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that so far as the offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, in the F.I.R. there is no reference of promulgation of any order which has been violated by the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention here that in the absence of any allegation of violation of any order promulgated by any public servant, the allegation made against the petitioner even if considered to be true in its entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 188 of Indian Penal Code is not made out. Cr.M.P. No.2289 of 2020 3 8. So far as the offence punishable under Section 269 of Indian Penal Code is concerned, the essential ingredients to constitute the said offence are:- (i) (ii) the accused unlawfully or negligently does any act; and the accused either knows or had reason to believe that such act is likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life. 9. Now coming to the facts of the case, undisputedly the petitioner was not present at the place at the time of the occurrence. The petitioner has been arrayed as an accused only because he is the owner of the two vehicles. As there is no material in the record to suggest that the petitioner unlawfully or negligently did any act which he knew or had a reason to believe to be likely to spread infection of any disease dangerous to life, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegation made against the petitioner are considered to be true in its entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 269 of the Indian Penal Code is also not made out against the petitioner. 10. So far as the offence punishable under Section 270 of Indian Penal Code is concerned, the essential ingredients to constitute the said offence are as under:- (1.) The accused malignantly does an act, (2) The accused knew or had reason to believe to be likely that such act will spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life. 11. Now, coming to the facts of the case, there is no allegation against the petitioner of having done any act malignantly. The expression Cr.M.P. No.2289 of 2020 4 ‘malignantly’ indicates that there ought to be a higher degree of malice or evil, projected or evident in the act alleged. There is no allegation of any malignant act committed by the petitioner and as the only allegation against the petitioner is that he is the owner of the two vehicles which was involved in transportation of pan masala. In the absence of this essential ingredient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 270 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety; still the offence punishable under Section 270 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioner. 12. In view of the discussions made above as none of the offences in respect of which FIR has been registered is made out even if the entire allegation against the petitioner are considered to be true in its entirety, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the FIR in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 44 of 2020 be quashed and set aside. 13. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the FIR in connection with Bano P.S. Case No. 44 of 2020 is quashed and set aside. 14.
Decision
In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 11th September, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- Cr.M.P. No.2289 of 2020 5