Jharkhand High Court
Sarita Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 September, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
Cr.M.P. No. 1487 of 2017
----
1.Sarita Devi, wife of Ranjit Singh
2.Renuka Kumar, daughter of Manohar Singh
Both residents of village Nawadih, PO and PS Narayanpur, District
Jamtara ..... Petitioners
-- Versus --
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Tekni Devi, wife of late Lakhpati Das, resident of village Nawadih, PO
and PS Narayanpur, District Jamtara ...... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
----
5/05.09.2022 Heard Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.Shailesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent State.
By order dated 27.11.2017 notice was issued upon the
O.P.No.2. The said notice was not received by the O.P.No.2, however, by order
dated 23.3.2022 again direction was issued to take fresh steps for notice
upon the O.P.No.2 and fresh steps for notice has been taken. Office note
suggest that the notice upon the O.P.No.2 has been effected however, on
5.5.2022 when nobody appeared on behalf of the O.P.No.2 the matter was
adjourned with a view to provide one more opportunity to the O.P.No.2.
Today when the matter was taken up again, on repeated call,
nobody has responded on behalf of the O.P.No.2.
In that view of the matter, the case has been heard on merit.
This petition has been filed for quashing of the order taking
cognizance dated 17.05.2017 in connection with Narayanpur P.S.Case No.136
of 2015 (G.R.No.721 of 2015), S.C./ST Case No.57 of 2017, pending in the
court of learned Special Judge, Jamtara.
Mr. Sarkhel, the learned counsel for the petitoners submits that
by order dated 25.01.2017 cognizance has already been taken against charge
sheeted persons. He submits that supplementary charge sheet has been filed
later on and by the impugned dated 17.5.2017 the learned court has taken
second cognizance of the offence against the petitioners.
Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, the learned State counsel submits
that supplementary charge sheet has been submitted and that is why the
learned court has taken the cognizance.
In view of the above fact and submission of the learned court
for the parties it is well settled that there is no need of taking second
cognizance for the offence has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Dharam Pal and Others v. State of Haryana and Another, (2014) 3
SCC 306, paragraph no.39 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:
39. This takes us to the next question as to whether
under Section 209, the Magistrate was required to take
cognizance of the offence before committing the case to the
Court of Session. It is well settled that cognizance of an offence
can only be taken once. In the event, a Magistrate takes
cognizance of the offence and then commits the case to the
Court of Session, the question of taking fresh cognizance of the
offence and, thereafter, proceed to issue summons, is not in
accordance with law. If cognizance is to be taken of the offence,
it could be taken either by the Magistrate or by the Court of
Session. The language of Section 193 of the Code very clearly
indicates that once the case is committed to the Court of Session
by the learned Magistrate, the Court of Session assumes original
jurisdiction and all that goes with the assumption of such
jurisdiction. The provisions of Section 209 will, therefore, have to
be understood as the learned Magistrate playing a passive role
in committing the case to the Court of Session on finding from
the police report that the case was triable by the Court of
Session. Nor can there be any question of part cognizance being
taken by the Magistrate and part cognizance being taken by the
learned Sessions Judge.
Once the supplementary charge sheet has been submitted and
further accused persons have been brought to face the trial the only thing is
required that summon be issued for appearance which is lacking in the case
in hand.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17.05.2017 in
connection with Narayanpur P.S.Case No.136 of 2015 (G.R.No.721 of 2015),
S.C./ST Case No.57 of 2017, pending in the court of learned Special Judge,
Jamtara is set aside.
In view of the above settled provision, the matter is remitted
back to the learned court concerned who will pass the fresh order by way of
passing summoning order against the petitioner.
This petition is disposed of.
I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
Interim order is vacated.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
