The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023 1. Pankaj Kumar aged about 33 years Son of Kishore Prasad resident of Rafiganj, P.O. and P.S. Rafiganj, District Aurangabad, Bihar. 2. Rajan Kumar @ Rajan Soni, aged about 37 years Son of Kishore Prasad resident of 82, New Area, Behind Block, Rafiganj P.O. and P.S. Rafiganj District Aurangabad, Bihar. 3. Kishore Prasad, aged about 52 years Son of Ram Prasad resident of Mahrajganj, Rafiganj, P.O. and P.S. Rafiganj District Aurangabad, Bihar. Versus ...... Petitioners 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Naina Kumari Daughter of Raju Soni, Wife of Pankaj Kumar resident of Gandhi Road, P.O. and P.S. Dhansar, District Dhanbad. ….. Opposite Parties For the Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, Adv. For the State For the Petitioner : Mr. Sri Shambhu Nath Tiwari,, Adv. : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl. PP P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:-
Facts
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 entire criminal proceeding as well as the order taking cognizance dated 03.06.2023 passed in connection with Complaint Case no. 3458 of 2023 passed by learned JM, Dhanbad, whereby and where under, learned JM, Dhanbad found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 498A, 504, 506 , 34 of IPC. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 being the husband, petitioner no. 2 being the elder brother of the husband and the petitioner no. 3, being the father –in-law of the complainant, treated the complainant with cruelty by harassing 1 Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023 her with a view to coerce her and her paternal family members to meet the unlawful demand of Rs. 5 lakhs as dowry and by the petitioner no. 1 not recognizing the complainant as his wife unless and until the said demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- is made by the complainant and her paternal family members. The petitioner no. 1 was also harassing the complainant by not residing with her and instead of keeping her in his house, insisted the complainant to live in the house of the friend of the petitioner no. 1. When the complainant complained about the same to the petitioner no. 2 and 3, the petitioner no. 2 and 3 insisted that the complainant must bring Rs. 5 lakhs from her father. The complainant was also harassed by being assaulted and was confined in a room and was not provided food and water. They were also harassing her by not allowing the complainant to talk to her paternal family members and even with her neighbors. The petitioners were not providing the complainant money for medicines and made her half-dead. The petitioner no. 1 used to terrorize the complainant by using different voices by telling her that some evil force is riding upon him and when the complainant wanted the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 to do something in this respect , they told the complainant that the only way out to settle her matrimonial house is by bringing Rs. 5 lakhs. The petitioners have dishonestly misappropriated articles worth Rs. 5 lakhs, over which they were having dominion; given to the complainant at the time of her marriage. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegation against the petitioners are all false. It is next submitted that prior to institution of the case, the petitioner no. 1 filed an informatory petition in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, Bihar apprehending the false implication in the case. It is next submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has also filed a petition for restitution of the conjugal life with the complainant. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 2 has submitted an informatory application before learned SDM, Aurangabad apprehending false implication. It is then submitted 2 Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023 that none of the offences for which the learned Magistrate has
Legal Reasoning
found prima facie case is made out against the petitioners, hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 5. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State and learned counsel for the Opp. party no. 2 on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer, as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and submit that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of treating the complainant with cruelty by harassing her with a view to coerce her to meet the unlawful demand of Rs. 5 lakhs of the petitioners, which is sufficient to constitute the offence perishable under Sections 498 A of IPC. There is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having dishonestly misappropriated the cash and articles worth Rs. 5,00,000/- given to the complainant at the time of her marriage with the petitioner no. 1 which is sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC. It is next submitted that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner no. 1 of criminally intimidating the complainant by threatening and talking to her in different voices and claiming that some evil force is riding upon him which will not allow the petitioner no. 1 to meet the complainant; in order to force the complainant to bring Rs. 5 lakhs from her parents, which the petitioner no. 1 is not legally entitled to. Hence it is submitted that offence punishable under section 506 of IPC is also made out against the petitioners. It is next submitted that the petitioners are intentionally insulting and thereby giving provocation to the complainant intending and knowing that such provocation will cause the victim to commit the offence of suicide, hence, it is submitted that offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC is made out against the petitioners. It is therefore submitted that as there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having committed the offences for which, the learned Magistrate has found prima facie 3 Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023 case, hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is the settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. 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) that the High Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of CrPC, cannot conduct a mini trial to ascertain the veracity of allegation levelled against the accused persons of the case or to appreciate the evidence. It is also settled principle of law that in exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC, the genuine prosecution cannot be stifled with 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. 7. Now coming to the facts of the case, as already indicated in the foregoing of this judgement, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of treating the complainant with cruelty by harassing her to meet the unlawful demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- and there is also allegation against the petitioners of having dishonestly misappropriating the cash and articles worth Rs. 5,00,000/- entrusted to them at the marriage of the complainant with the petitioner no. 1. There is also allegation against the 4 Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023 petitioner no. 1 of criminally intimidating the complainant and insulting her intentionally to drive her to commit the offence of suicide. 8. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justification in quashing the entire criminal proceeding as well as the order taking cognizance dated 03.06.2023 passed in connection with Complaint Case no. 3458 of 2023 at this nascent stage. 9. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit is dismissed. In view of the dismissal of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, the I.A. No. 7358 of 2024 is also disposed of being infructuous. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 16th December, 2024 Smita /AFR (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 5 Cr.M.P. No. 3030 of 2023