Jharkhand High Court
Shiv Kumar Khemka vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 November, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1861 of 2014
1. Shiv Kumar Khemka
2. Anand Mohan Roy
3. Shiv Das Pandit
4. Bajrang Prasad Dalmia ..... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Karan Hari ..... ... Opposite Parties
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate.
: Mr. Ankur Anand, Advocate.
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Vikram Sinha, Advocate.
------
06/ 06.11.2023 Heard Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P. for the State and
Mr. Vikram Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire
criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated
05.06.2014, by which, cognizance for the offence under sections 323,
379/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act has been taken against the petitioners, in connection
with Complaint Case No. 112 of 2014, pending in the court of learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad.
3. The complaint case was filed by the O.P. No. 2 alleging
therein that the petitioners have stopped the salary of the O.P. No. 2 and
for payment of the same, when the O.P. No. 2 met the petitioner Nos. 2
and 3 on 14.12.2013, they abused the O.P. No. 2 by mentioning his
caste.
It is further alleged in the complaint petition that again the
O.P. No. 2 met all the petitioners on 07.01.2014 and upon seeking
the O.P. No. 2, the petitioners started abusing him by mentioning
his caste and the petitioner No. 3 snatched Rs. 600/- from the
pocket of the O.P. No. 2.
4. Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 1 is the Secretary, petitioner
No. 2 is the C.M.O., petitioner No. 3 is the Supervisor and the
petitioner No. 4 is the Chairman of the Dwarika Das Jalal Memorial
Hospital, Dhanbad. He submits that the O.P. No. 2 was employed as
sweeper in the said hospital and was regularly paid the salary. He
further submits that the chart of payment is annexed as Annexure-4 of
the petition. He further submits that the only allegation against the
petitioners in the complaint petition is that the salary of the O.P. No. 2
was not paid for that maliciously the present complaint case has been
filed and even the SC/ST Act has been added, wherein the ingredients
of SC/ST Act is not made out, as it is not stated in the complaint
petition that the petitioners are not belonging to the caste of the O.P.
No. 2. He further submits that the conduct of the O.P. No. 2 was not
proper and a complaint to that effect has been made by a nurse before
the authorities that's why the O.P. No. 2 was removed from the work.
He further submits that maliciously the present case has been filed.
5. Mr. Vikram Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the O.P.
No. 2 submits that the salary of the O.P. No. 2 has not been paid and
when he has gone to demand the same, the petitioners have abused him.
He submits that the case is made out, as such, this court may not
exercise its power to quash the proceedings.
6. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State
submits that on the complaint petition, the learned court has taken the
cognizance.
7. In view of the above submissions of the parties, the court
has gone through the materials available on record including the
contents of the complaint petition. Admittedly, in the Solemn
Affirmation, O.P. No. 2 has alleged that the salary has not been paid to
him and if any dispute is there with regard to the salary, the criminal
complaint is not a remedy, whereas the action is required to be taken
before the another forum. Further the court finds that even the SC/ST
Act has been inserted in the complaint case and there is no averment
that the petitioners are not belonging to the caste of the O.P. No. 2 and
in view of that so far as that Act is concerned, the case of the petitioner
is fully covered in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Gorige Pentaiah Versus State of A.P. & Ors., reported in
(2008) 12 SCC 531.
8. It appears that the petitioners are the Secretary, the C.M.O.,
the Supervisor and the Chairman of the reputed Dwarika Das
Jalal Memorial Hospital in the district of Dhanbad and maliciously the
present case has been filed. The statement with regard to payment of
salary has been brought on record as Annexure-4 to the petition, which
suggests that the payment was being made to the O.P. No. 2 through
Bank transaction and if any dispute with regard to salary is there, the
petitioner is having the remedy under the different forum.
9. In view of the above and considering that maliciously the
complaint case has been filed against the petitioners, the entire criminal
proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 05.06.2014, by
which, cognizance for the offence under sections 323, 379/34 Indian
Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act has been taken against the petitioners, in connection with
Complaint Case No. 112 of 2014, pending in the court of learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad, are hereby, quashed.
10. This petition is allowed and disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
