Md. Moin Ansari @ Moin Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1194 Jhar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                     Cr.M.P. No. 191 of 2021
                1. Md. Moin Ansari @ Moin Ansari
                2. Majubul Rahman @ Mujibul [email protected] Bablu
                3. Safejul Ansari @ Tafaizul @ Safjul @ Sahfuj Ansari ... Petitioner(s).

                                                   -Versus-
                   The State of Jharkhand                                     ... Opp. Party(s).
                                          ------

           CORAM        :     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
                              Through: Video Conferencing
                                                 ------

           For the Petitioner(s)   : Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Advocate.
           For the State           : Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, AC to SC-V
                                         .........
04/09.03.2021:          The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which

has been held through video conferencing today at 11:00 A.M. They have no complaint in respect of the audio and video clarity and quality.

2. Heard the counsel for the parties.

3. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 5.1.2021 by which, the learned CJM, Lohardaga, has taken cognizance for the offence under Section(s) 147, 149, 341, 342, 332, 353, 186, 189 and 504 IPC in connection with Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 116/2018 (G.R. No. 360 of 2018).

4. Counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no material to take cognizance in this case. He also submits that the court below has wrongly taken cognizance against all the accused persons, through as per law, cognizance is taken against the offence and not against the accused persons. He further submits that as to what are the materials to proceed against the accused persons, has not been mentioned in the order impugned. He also relies upon the judgment passed in case of Amresh Kumar Dhiraj and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Another, reported in 2020 (1) JLJR 199 (Jhr.).

5. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer of the petitioners but after going through the order impugned, he cannot justify the order impugned.

6. After going through the record and the order impugned, I find that the court below has taken cognizance for the offence under Section(s) 147, 149, 341, 342, 332, 353, 186, 189 and 504 IPC. Further the cognizance has been taken against the accused persons. It is well settled proposition of law that the cognizance is taken against offence and summons are issued against the accused persons. What are the materials against the petitioners has not been mentioned in the order impugned. In most mechanical way, the order taking cognizance has been passed. This Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Dhiraj and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Another, reported in 2020 (1) JLJR 199 (Jhr.) has passed the detailed order discussing the provisions of Sections 190 and 204 Cr.P.C. The impugned order is not in consonance with the aforesaid order.

7. In view of the aforesaid facts, I find that order dated 5.1.2021 is not in consonance with the provisions as laid down under Sections 190 and 204 Cr.P.C. Thus, order impugned is, hereby, quashed and set aside.

8. Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

9. The learned court below is directed to pass order afresh in accordance with the provisions of law.

Anu/C.P.-3                                                   (ANANDA SEN, J.)