Parmanand Pradhan, aged about 38 years, son of Laxmi Narayan Pradhan, resident of Asangi v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Hmelata Bakhariya, wife of Natwarlal Bakhariya, resident of
Case Details
1 Cr.M.P. No.4378 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 4378 of 2022 Parmanand Pradhan, aged about 38 years, son of Laxmi Narayan Pradhan, resident of Asangi, P.O.- Adityapur, Industrial Area, P.S.- Adityapur, Dist.- Saraikella- Kharsawan .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Hmelata Bakhariya, wife of Natwarlal Bakhariya, resident of 4 R, Road, Bistupur, P.O. & P.S.- Bistupur, Dist.- East Singhbhum …. Opp. Parties P R E S E N T
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner For the State For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Dilip Kr. Chakraverty, Advocate : Mr. Devesh Krishna, SC (Mines-II) : Mr. Peeyush Krishna Choudhary, Advocate : Mr. Amrit Anunay, Advocate : Mr. Rajesh Thakur, Advocate ….. By the Court:- 1. 2. 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 for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella in G.R. No. 1364 of 2016 (S) arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No. 291 of 2016. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner by the said order dated 28.11.2022. 2 Cr.M.P. No.4378 of 2022 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons has committed forgery, cheating and criminal breach of trust and thereby a sum of Rs.14,47,000/- being the cheated amount was transferred to the bank account of the petitioner and the same is part of Rs.45,00,000/- deposited by the informant with the bank under the fixed deposit. It is alleged that the said act has been committed by the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the officers of the concerned bank and others. The petitioner was not named in the FIR but along with seven named accused persons of the case, two other unknown persons were also mentioned in the FIR and the petitioner is one of them. 4. On 28.11.2022, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella took up the petition submitted by the I.O. for issuance of non- bailable warrant of arrest inter alia against the petitioner. The said petition of the I.O. was accompanied by the case diary. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella considered the fact that the petitioner is involved in commission of non-bailable offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and evading his arrest. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella also considered that inter alia the name of the petitioner came in the light of the report submitted by the inquiry committee of the bank and from the various paragraphs of the case diary as mentioned in the order concerned, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella is satisfied that the petitioner is evading his arrest and recorded its satisfaction 3 Cr.M.P. No.4378 of 2022 about the petitioner being involved in a non-bailable offences and willfully evading his arrest and absconding and the punishment involved in the offence punishable under Section 467 of Indian Penal Code may extent to 10 years and directed for issue of non- bailable warrant of arrest. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and a notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. has been issued, six years after the institution of the case. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the investigation of the case is going on and charge sheet has not been submitted as yet but in paragraph no.13 of the petition, the petitioner has mentioned that till submission of charge sheet, the investigating agency did not have an iota of evidence against the petitioner which has wrongly been mentioned under oath by the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella in G.R. No. 1364 of 2016 (S) arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No. 291 of 2016 be quashed and set aside. 6. Learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand opposes the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella in G.R. No. 1364 of 2016 (S) arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No. 291 of 2016 and submits that during the investigation of the case, the involvement of the petitioner was 4 Cr.M.P. No.4378 of 2022 established as part of the defalcated money was transferred to the bank account of the petitioner and he has been found to be in league with the co-accused persons in committing the offences. Hence, it is 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, this Court finds that there is serious allegation against the petitioner of committing offences of cheating, forgery, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons. There is also direct allegation against the petitioner of having been involved in the said conspiracy as part of the cheated amount of Rs.14,47,000/- has been transferred to the bank account of the petitioner. Thus this court is of the considered view and that there is no illegality in the said order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella as the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella has after being satisfied that the petitioner is involved in a non- bailable offences and evading his arrest; has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against him. 8. It is a settled principle of law that a legitimate prosecution cannot be stifled at the initial stage by exercise of the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the High Court as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr.) and another v. State of U.P. and others, reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 5 Cr.M.P. No.4378 of 2022 9. In view of the discussions made above, this Court do not find any justifiable reason to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 28.11.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella in G.R. No. 1364 of 2016 (S) arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No. 291 of 2016. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit is dismissed. The interim order if any granted earlier to the petitioner stands vacated. Registry to intimate the Court concerned forthwith. 10. 11. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 12th December, 2023 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)