Jharkhand High Court
Batul Mahto @ Batul Mahato vs The State Of Jharkhand on 8 September, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2019
----
1.Batul Mahto @ Batul Mahato, aged about 44 years, son of Lakhu Mahto,
resident of village Muraidih Basti, P.O. Pochari, P.S. Barora, Muraidih,
District Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
2.Balram Mahto @ Balram Sao @ Balram Mahato, aged about 43 years,
son of Arjun Mahto, resident of village Bara Pandey Dih, PO Khanoodih,
P.S.Baghmara, District Dhanbad
3.Raj Shankar Rai @ Shankar Rai, aged about 29 years, son of Haribol Rai,
resident of village Dumra, PO Nawagarh, P.S. Baghmara, District Dhanbad
(Jharkhand)
4.Shatrughan Mahto @ Shrad @ Shatrughan Mahato, aged about 49
years, son of Puna Mahto, resident of village Chitahi, PO Tundu, P.S.
Barora, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
5.Suresh Kumar Saw @ Suresh Saw @ Suresh Sao, aged about 40 years,
son of Gora Saw, resident of New Colony, Muraidih, P.O. Pochari, P.S.
Barora, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
6.Tanveer Alam @ Bablu Ansari, aged about 38 years, son of Md. Latif
Ansari, resident of villag Hatiya Tand, P.O.Baghmara, P.S Baghmara,
District Dhanbad, Jharkhand
7.Dulu Mahto @ Dhallu Mahato, aged about 44 years, son of Puna Mahto,
resident of village Chitahi, P.O. Tundu, PS Barora, District Dhanbad
Jharkhand
8.Ajay Kumar Saw @ Ajay Gorai @ Ajay Mahato, aged about 34 years, son
of Bishu Mahto, resident of Village Tundu, PO Tundu, PS Barora, District
Dhanbad, Jharkhand ..... Petitioners
-- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
----
3/08.09.2022 This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated
4.4.2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in
connection with Baghmara (Barora) P.S.Case No.150 of 2006,
corresponding to G.R. No.1982 of 2006 whereby learned court has taken
cognizance against the petitioners pending in the court of learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad.
Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners submits that the case is barred in view of section 468 of the
Cr.P.C and learned court has taken cognizance by order dated 4.4.2019.
He submits that Constitution Bench judgment rendered in the case of
Sarah Mathew v. Institution of Cardio Vascular Diseases, (2014) 2 SCC 62
is not attracting in the case of the petitioners.
On the other hand, Mr. Tiwary, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that the F.I.R has
been registered within time. The occurrence took place on 25.6.2006 and
on the same day, the FIR has been registered as Barora P.S. Case No.150
of 2006. He submits that few of the petitioners were absconding and the
investigation was going on and thereafter the charge sheet has been
submitted and learned court has taken cognizance by the impugned
order vide order dated 4.4.2019.
The Court has perused the materials on record and finds
the F.I.R was registered on 25.6.2006 itself which is the date of
occurrence. In the case of Sarah Mathew (supra) in paragraph 51 of the
said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:
51. In view of the above, we hold that for the purpose of
computing the period of limitation under Section 468 CrPC the
relevant date is the date of filing of the complaint or the date of
institution of prosecution and not the date on which the
Magistrate takes cognizance. We further hold that Bharat Kale
which is followed in Japani Sahoo lays down the correct law.
Krishna Pillai will have to be restricted to its own facts and it is not
the authority for deciding the question as to what is the relevant
date for the purpose of computing the period of limitation under
Section 468 CrPC.
In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Sara Mathew(supra), the case of the petitioners is not fit to
be entertained.
Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No.2649 of 2019 is dismissed.
I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
