Amal Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 3912 Jhar

       IN     THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              Cr.M.P. No. 1757 of 2022
       Amal Khan                                      .....   ...     Petitioner
                                    Versus
      1. The State of Jharkhand.
      2. Jahur Ansari                                ..... ...      Opposite Parties
                                --------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate.

      For the State             :        Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P.
                                ------

04/ 23.09.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 05.09.2020, passed in Ormanjhi P.S. Case No. 184 of 2019 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, whereby cognizance for the offences under Sections 341, 342, 323, 504, 506, 379, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner, pending in that court.

3. The case was instituted on the basis of written report of the informant alleging therein that on call made by the petitioner, this informant reached Virat Dhaba Anandi then petitioner took him to his car and put on knife upon the informant and asked him to had over the document of agreement by which informant has to receive a sum of Rs. 9,69,496/- from the petitioner with regard to supply of stone-chips (gitti). Further he alleged that when informant refused to hand over the same without receiving payment then accused along with his two associates took him to RTC Engineering College Road and extended threat of dire consequences if he not returned the aforesaid agreement document and also assaulted him by means of slaps and snatched away a sum of Rs. 25,000/- cash one gold chain which was around the neck of the informant. Further he alleged that anyhow informant saved himself by fleeing away.

On the basis of aforesaid written report, Ormanjhi P.S. Case No. 184 of 2019 has been registered under Sections 341, 342, 323, 504, 506, 379, 406, 420, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner was only the employee of M/s Sahil Projects & Planning Pvt. Ltd. and he has no role with the case. On these grounds he submits that the entire proceedings and the order taking cognizance are bad in law. He relied in the case of Puesh Kumar & Ors. Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors., reported in (2019) 0 Supreme (Jhk) 705.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State submits that there is

direct allegation against the petitioner and the learned court has rightly taken the cognizance against the petitioner.

6. In view of such submissions of the parties, the court has gone through the contents of the FIR and finds that there is allegation against the petitioner of threatening the informant and by way of putting knife on the neck of the informant, he has demanded some documents. The petitioner also used filthy language against the informant and also assaulted him. The court has also gone through the cognizance order, from which, it transpires that the learned court has taken the cognizance after going through the case diary.

7. The judgment relied by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is on different footing and the case was registered under Sections 420 and 406 IPC and after cancellation of the dealership, the case was filed and the intention from the very beginning was not there, that's why the order has been passed. In the case in hand, there is allegation of assaulting and threatening the informant, as such, the judgment relied by him is not helping the petitioner.

8. In view of the above, no case of interference is made out, as such, this petition is dismissed.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/-