Jharkhand High Court
Nurul Kazi vs The State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 6 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. A. (SJ) No. 234 of 2023
Nurul Kazi ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ... ... Respondents
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. M.B.Lal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. S. K.Verma, APP
--------
th
Order No.04/Dated: 6 October, 2023
This matter is listed today by virtue of mentioning slip dated
3.9.2023.
The present appeal is directed against the order dated 1.3.2023
passed by the learned Additional sessions Judge-Vth cum Special Judge
SC/ST, Dhanbad in SC/ST Case No. 14 of 2021 (MCA No. 873 of 2023),
whereby and whereunder the petition under section 227 of the Cr.P.C. for
discharge of the appellant was rejected.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant is a social
worker and the appellant asked him for some help for marriage of his sister.
Thereafter, on 13.9.2019 the informant gave him Rs. 1,50,000/- in presence
of Hira Lal Dutta and Tarjan Marandi at the Tea Shop of Hiralal Dutta.
Further, Tarjan Marandi also gave him Rs. 1,20,000/- on 15.9.2010 in the
said Tea Shop. When the appellant asked for more help then the informant
again helped him with Rs. 1,50,000/- and Tarjan Marandi also gave him Rs.
80,000/-. In this way they gave him Rs. 5 lakhs. Thereafter, the appellant
executed an agreement paper with a promise to return the said amount with
10% interest within six months. The informant asked the said amount after
six months then the appellant started evading. On 29.1.2021 the appellant
abused the informant by his caste name and assaulted the informant's party.
The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present
case is with regard to money transaction and is civil in nature. He has further
submitted that the informant never paid any amount to the appellant. The
appellant returned the entire amount to Tarjan Marandi and there was some
dispute with regard to interest and for this reason the present case was
lodged. He has further submitted that the police has submitted the charge
sheet without proper investigation. He has further submitted that the learned
trial court has not considered the fact that the informant failed to produce any
chit of paper regarding payment of money to the appellant. He has further
submitted that the appellant had taken loan from Tarjan Marandi which was
already repaid. The trial court has also not considered the fact that sections of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
was added by the informant only to make out a case. He further submits that
as would appear from the FIR itself that the informant is a social worker and
in another hand he is doing business of money lending. He has further
submitted that no case is made out under sections 406 and 420 IPC as there
was no intention to cheat. He has further submitted that no case is also made
out for the offence under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The learned counsel for the appellant relied upon a
judgment rendered by the Hon'be supreme Court in the case of "Bhawna Bai
v. Ghanshyam and others" (Cr. Appeal No. 1820 of 2019 arising out of
SLP(Cri) No. 6964 of 2019).
The learned counsel for the State has submitted that notice has
been served to the informant on 27.5.2023 (Annexure-B to counter-affidavit).
He has further submitted that there is sufficient material against
the appellant for the offence under sections 406, 420, 341, 323, 504/34 IPC
and Section 3(1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act,1989.The appellant is named accused in Nirsa PS
(MPLOP) Case No. 35 of 2021 for the above sections. He has further
submitted that informant in his re-statement at paragraph no.4 of the case
diary and the witnesses in paragraph nos. 6,7,8,9 and 10 of the case diary
have fully supported the prosecution case. On 30.1.2021 the Investigating
Officer has inspected the place of occurrence which is situated near the road
going towards Pandra Basti where the appellant has been intercepted and
assaulted by the informant and, therefore, offences under Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is fully made out.
The informant has also produced a photocopy of stamped document stating
that the appellant took total Rs. 3,00,000/- from the informant @ 10% per
annum interest for marriage of his sister and he would return the same in
within six months. He has also submitted that the judgment cited by the
learned counsel for the appellant is distinguishable in the sense that in the
present case sections under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are involved.
Heaving heard both the learned counsels and considering the
records available including impugned judgment, I find no reason to set-aside
the order dated 01.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional sessions Judge-
Vth cum Special Judge SC/ST, Dhanbad in SC/ST Case No. 14 of 2021 (MCA
No. 873 of 2023).
Accordingly, this Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 234 of 2023 stands
dismissed.
KNR (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
