Madhusudan vs The State Of Jharkhand Through ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 226 Jhar

                                                  Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013




   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013
                                    ------

Madhusudan, S/o Late Rameshwar Paswan, R/O- P.O. + P.S.- Argora, District- Ranchi ... Petitioner Versus

The State of Jharkhand through Vigilance Bureau, at Audrey House, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Gonda, Distt.- Ranchi, Jharkhand ... Opposite Party

------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Prashant Pallav, Adv.

     For the Vigilance            : Mr. Suraj Verma, Spl. P.P.
                                    ------
                            PRESENT
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

By the Court:- Heard the parties through video conferencing.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the

jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of this Court of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 with the following prayers:-

(a) for quashing the F.I.R. and entire criminal proceeding in connection

with Vigilance P.S. Case No.39 of 2013 corresponding to Spl. Case No.42

of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420,

406, 409, 467, 468, 469, 471, 477A, 109 & 120 B of the Indian Penal Code

and under Section 13 (2) read with 13 (1) of the Prevention of Corruption

Act, 1988 pending before the court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance,

Ranchi.

(b) to pass such order for stay of the investigation and that no coercive

action be taken against the petitioner in connection to Vigilance P.S. Case

No.39 of 2013 corresponding to Spl. Case No.42 of 2013 in the further

Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013

proceedings in the present criminal case bearing Vigilance P.S. Case

No.39 of 2013.

(c) for quashing of the cognizance order dated 14.09.2015 in connection

with Spl.Case No.42 of 2013 , Vigilance P.S. Case No.39 of 2013, in which

the learned court of Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi took cognizance of

the offence under section 419, 420, 406, 477A, 109, 201 & 120 B of the

Indian Penal Code and under Section 13 (2) read with 13 (1) of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 which, on the face of it, is illegal and

arbitrary as no offence as alleged under the said section is made out.

3. It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the

allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, on the basis of

forged caste certificate by way of cheating, committing forgery and using

forged document as genuine, has appeared in 37th Bihar Public Service

Commission, Combined Civil Services Examination and on the basis of

such forged caste certificate, he was appointed as Deputy Superintendent

of Police. It is further alleged that the petitioner belongs to the Baniya

caste (backward) and in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused- the then

Block Development Officer and the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nawada, got

the certificate No.30 dated 06.02.1992 issued by way of cheating and

forgery mentioning therein that the petitioner is a member of Scheduled

Caste.

It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the

prosecution has taken support from the order passed in L.P.A. No.708 of

2002 by the Hon'ble High Court of Patna, where the Hon'ble High Court

of Patna has held the termination order of the petitioner to be valid. It is

Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013

next submitted that the petitioner has also filed W.P.(C) No.3288 of 2017

for quashing the order dated 07.06.2017 passed by the Caste Scrutiny

Committee, State of Jharkhand whereby the claim of the petitioner for

Scheduled Caste status has been rejected and the order was forwarded to

Principal Secretary Home, Prison and Disaster Management, Government

of Jharkhand but the said W.P.(C) No.3288 of 2017 has been dismissed

vide judgment dated 11.10.2017 and L.P.A. No.571 of 2017, filed by the

petitioner challenging the said order of the learned single judge of this

Court is, sub judice. It is then submitted that the natural father of the

petitioner in the year 1978 gave the petitioner in adoption to his

immediate neighbor Rameshwar Paswan who was issueless and the

adoption of the petitioner by Rameshwar Paswan who was a member of

Scheduled Caste is a valid adoption and the caste certificate was issued in

favour of the petitioner by the competent authority and the petitioner

rendered service in Bihar Police for nine years. Hence, it is submitted that

the prayers in this petition made by the petitioner has already indicated

above in this judgment be allowed.

4. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the Vigilance on the other hand

opposes the prayer and submits that the Caste Scrutiny Committee whose

order has not been interfered with by the learned Single Judge of this

Court in W.P.(C) No. 3288 of 2017 goes to show that the petitioner is not

entitled to claim himself to be a member of Scheduled Caste Category

and at the most it is a defence of the petitioner that he has been validly

adopted by a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste community and he

can take the defence during the full dress trial of the case and the same

Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013

being a pure issue of fact, the same cannot be adjudicated in a minitrial in

a petition under section 482 of this Whole of Criminal Procedure. It is

lastly submitted that this petition, being without any merit, be dismissed.

5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after carefully

going through the materials in the record, this Court finds that the

petitioner wants the F.I.R. to be quashed and other reliefs prayed for by

him in this petition to be allowed only on the basis of his claim that he

was validly adopted by a person who belongs to the Scheduled Caste

only, but this Court is of the considered view that this being issue of fact

as rightly submitted by Mr. Suraj Verma, learned Spl. P.P. appearing for

the Vigilance and the same can be taken as defence during the trial of the

case. It is needless to mention that this is not a case where the allegations

made in the first information report even if they are taken at their face value

and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or

make out a case against the accused nor this is a case where there is any

allegation that this criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala

fide and/or 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; which inter alia are the grounds for quashing

the FIR as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case

of State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors (1992 AIR SC

604). Charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case since long and the

case is fixed for consideration of framing of charge. Thus, this Court is not

inclined to quash the F.I.R. or to allow other connected prayers of the

petitioner as made by the petitioner in the instant Criminal Miscellaneous

petition.

Cr. M.P. No.2954 of 2013

6. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition, being without

any merit, is dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 03rd of February, 2022.

AFR/ Pappu