Bimal Kumar Deogharia @ Vimal Deodharia @ Vimal Devgharia @ Vimel Devdharia, aged about v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sunita Devi, wife of Anand Nayak, resident of
Case Details
Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 ------ Bimal Kumar Deogharia @ Vimal Deodharia @ Vimal Devgharia @ Vimel Devdharia, aged about 49 years, son of Nishikant Deogharia, resident of Patratu Basti, P.O. + P.S.+ District- Ramgarh … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sunita Devi, wife of Anand Nayak, resident of Patratu Basti, P.O. Opposite Parties P.S. + District Ramgarh … ------ For the Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Addl.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : None ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. Though the opposite party No.2 has put in her appearance through her lawyer but no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls. 3. This Cr.M.P. has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 29.07.2022 whereby and where under cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354-A, 504, 506, 323, 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act has been taken and summons has been issued in connection with Complaint-cum- Protest Petition Case No.15 of 2021 (SC/ST Case No.15 of 2021) which is 1 Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ramgarh-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ramgarh. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 19.02.2020 when the victim girl of 16 years was returning from her tuition, the petitioner forcibly took her to his house and with ill intention molested her. The daughter of the complainant raised hue and cry by which the wife, daughter and tenant of the petitioner came and told the victim girl- who is the daughter of the complainant, not to use Ghasibudhhi and Chamaribudhhi and assaulted her. Thereafter, police was called from the police station. No female police was with the police party. The daughter of the complainant was taken to police station in police vehicle. Police informed the complainant that her daughter is in the police station and the complainant was summoned to the police station. She saw that her daughter is in the police station and the police released the victim- daughter of the complainant for her treatment. On the next day, the victim was to appear in her board examination so she was taken by her mother for the same and on the next day the victim was treated in Sadar Hospital. From the question to the court, the complainant has stated that she has not seen the occurrence. She has not ever gone to the house of the accused person. In her statement as inquiry witness, the victim herself has stated that at 12:00 noon on 19.02.2020 when the victim was returning from her tuition, the petitioner finding the victim to be alone took her to his room by catching hold of her hand and told her Ghasin and Chamarin and as to whether the road belongs to her father and molested her, touched parts of her body. She raised hue and cry at which the wife, daughter and tenant of the petitioner came and assaulted the victim with stick. After that police reached the spot and took her to police 2 Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 station. After two hours her mother and others reached Ramgarh Police Station and she was taken to hospital. There was injury and pain in her body and medicines were administered to her. 5. The inquiry witness No.2 is a hearsay witness and he has also supported the case of the complainant. Similarly, the inquiry witness No.3 is the grandmother of the victim and she is also a hearsay witness who has supported the case of the complainant. 6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ramgarh-cum-Special Judge, under the SC/ST Act, Ramgarh found prima facie case for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354-A, 504, 506, 323, 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act. 7. Mr. Pratik Sen- learned counsel for the petitioner submits that police after due investigation of the case, found the case to be false. It is next submitted that in paragraph-21 of the case-diary it has been categorically mentioned that during investigation and supervision it was found that on 19.02.2020 the victim while returning from her tuition with her boyfriend entered inside the broken room of the brother of the petitioner and when the victim and her boyfriend were seen in a compromising position, the mob assembled there and later police reached there and took both the victim and her boyfriend to the police station and from there they were released in the protection of their parents on Zimmanama and it was found that the victim and her boyfriend were healthy and did not sustain any injury nor they complained of any assault or abuse. The police from the C.C.T.V. footage of the nearby camera found the victim and her boyfriend entering inside the place of occurrence room one by one and later on police came out from the room along 3 Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 with the victim and her boyfriend. Both of them were walking freely. It is next submitted that the petitioner produced the C.C.T.V. footage and the pictures before the Superintendent of Police, Ramgarh along with a detailed representation and police after detailed investigation submitted final report. It is next submitted that during the investigation by police, it was also found that, undertakings were given in writing by the parents of Ravi Karmali- the boyfriend of the victim as well as the parents of the victim for the incident when they were caught red handed by police in a compromising position and no injury has been sustained by anybody. It is next submitted that this case has been instituted for wrecking vengeance. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vineet Kumar & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another reported in (2017) 13 SCC 369 paragraph-41 of which reads as under:- 41. Inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 CrPC is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go on if the case falls in one of the categories as illustratively enumerated by this Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] . Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are materials to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] , which is to the following effect: (SCC p. 379, para 102) “102. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 4 Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 Above Category 7 is clearly attracted in the facts of the present case. Although, the High Court has noted the judgment of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] , but did not advert to the relevant facts of the present case, materials on which final report was submitted by the IO. We, thus, are fully satisfied that the present is a fit case where the High Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and quashed the criminal proceedings. (Emphasis supplied) and submits that judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of oppression or harassment and when there are materials to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceeding. 9. It is next submitted that the undisputed C.C.T.V. footage as well as the undertaking given by the parents of both the victim girl and her boyfriend in the police station and the admitted fact that only the victim and her boyfriend were taken to the police station, clearly makes out the case to having been instituted for wrecking vengeance and has maliciously been instituted with ulterior motive. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal as prayed for by the petitioner be quashed. 10. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State however opposes the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding as prayed for by the petitioner and submits that protest-cum-complaint petition as well as the statement on solemn affirmation and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, no doubt discloses the offence for which cognizance has been taken by the learned Special Judge. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit, be dismissed. 11. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the evidence in the record, this Court finds that the undisputed 5 Cr. M.P. No.3588 of 2022 fact remains that there was a C.C.T.V. footage in which the victim and her boyfriend were seen going inside the broken room of the brother of the petitioner one by one and they came out by the police. The undisputed fact also remains that the victim and her boyfriend were taken to the police station and were released on Zimma after undertaking of their parents. Under such undisputed facts, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the materials indicate that this criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court, the continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of the court and it is a fit case where in the interest of justice the entire criminal proceeding, be quashed and set aside. 12. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 29.07.2022 whereby and where under cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354-A, 504, 506, 323, 342 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act has been taken and summons has been issued in connection with Complaint-cum-Protest Petition Case No.15 of 2021 (SC/ST Case No.15 of 2021) which is pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge- I, Ramgarh-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ramgarh, is quashed and set aside. 13.
Decision
In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 26th of June, 2023 AFR/ Animesh 6