Randhir Narayan vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3896 Jhar

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 W.P. (Cr.) No. 556 of 2023
                 Randhir Narayan                              ... Petitioner
                                        -Versus-
            1.   The State of Jharkhand
            2.   The Superintendent of Police, Bokaro
            3.   The Officer-in-Charge, Chas Police Station, Bokaro
            4.   Sohan Kumar Gupta                            ... Respondents
                                             -----

            CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                             -----
            For the Petitioner         : Mr. Deepankar, Advocate
            For the State              : Mr. Aditya Kumar, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-I
            For Respondent No.4        : Mr. Arun Kumar Dubey, Advocate
                                             -----

06/11.10.2023     Heard Mr. Deepankar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Arun

Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and Mr. Aditya Kumar,

learned counsel for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding

including FIR in connection with Chas P.S. Case No. 244/2015,

corresponding to G.R. No.1203/2015 registered for the offence punishable

under Section 323/341/406/420/468/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code,

pending in the Court of the learned A.C.J.M., Bokaro.

3. Mr. Deepankar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

complaint case was filed for refunding the amount which was invested by

respondent no.4 with the petitioner, which was sent by the learned Court for

investigation and registration of FIR under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. He further

submits that now a good sense has prevailed between the petitioner and

respondent no.4, who is the informant and the petitioner has returned the

amount of Rs.85,000/- to respondent no.4. He also submits that for that, a

joint compromise petition in form of I.A. No.7454 of 2023 has been filed.

4. Mr. Dubey, learned counsel for respondent no.4, who is informant,

submits that the said complaint case has been filed for recovery of that

amount and the dispute is between the petitioner and respondent no.4. He

further submits that respondent no.4 has already received the sum of

Rs.85,000/- and he does not want to proceed with the case.

5. Mr. Kumar, learned counsel for the State submits that it appears that

the dispute is between the petitioner and respondent no.4 and joint

compromise petition speaks of refund of Rs.85,000/- to the informant. He

further submits that this Court may pass appropriate order.

6. Looking into the above submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties and further the complaint case, which has been converted into FIR,

it appears that the dispute is between the petitioner and respondent no.4.

Respondent no.4 has already received a sum of Rs.85,000/-, which has

been disclosed in the said I.A. and the said I.A. is affidavited separately by

the petitioner and respondent no.4. It further appears that there is no

societal interest involved in the matter and till then, charge-sheet has not

been submitted, whereas, the case was registered in the year 2015 and

further considering the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another; [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and

in Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab & another; [(2014) 6

SCC 466, the entire criminal proceeding including FIR in connection with

Chas P.S. Case No. 244/2015, corresponding to G.R. No.1203/2015, pending

in the Court of the learned A.C.J.M., Bokaro is quashed.

7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and disposed of.

8. Pending I.A., if any, is disposed of.

9. Interim order, if any granted by this Court, stands vacated.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/