Jharkhand High Court
Brij Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 September, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(Cr.) No. 372 of 2018
Brij Kumar Sinha
.... ...Petitioner
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2. Satya Narayan Sah
..... ...Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioner: Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate
Mr. Saurav Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Shivika Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ravi Kerketta, S.C.-VI
Mr. Piyush Anand, A.C. to S.C.-VI
08/ Dated:-05.09.2023
By order dated 06.12.2018, notice upon respondent no.2
has been issued. Office note suggests that notice has been received
personally by the respondent no. 2. However, nobody appeared on
behalf of respondent no.2.
2. By order dated 10.08.2023 the matter was adjourned
with a view to provide one more opportunity to the respondent no.2
and it was observed that if on the next date, the respondent no.2
will not appear, the matter shall be decided in absence of
respondent no. 2. Today, on repeated calls, nobody responded on
behalf of the respondent no. 2. Accordingly, this matter is being
heard in absence of the respondent no.2.
3. This petition has been filed for quashing the part of
judgment dated 15.09.2018 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-II, Godda in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 2018
whereby he has directed the Superintendent of Police, Godda to
recover Rs. 1,00,000/- from the petitioner and pay the same in
favour of accused Satya Narayan Sah and to initiate departmental
proceeding against him.
4. Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner was the Investigating Officer who has
investigated Pathargama P.S. Case No. 08/2018 registered under
section 376 of I.P.C. He submits that in the said case after
investigation chargesheet was submitted and the learned court has
taken cognizance however, by the judgment dated 15.09.2018
passed in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 2018, the accused has been
acquitted and direction was issued to the Superintendent of Police,
Godda to recover Rs. 1,00,000/- from the petitioner and to pay the
same in favour of accused Satya Narayan Sah and to initiate
department proceeding against him. He submits that now the
petitioner has retired. He further submits that this Court may quash
the said part of order.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that
acquittal order is there however the said direction has been issued.
6. In view of above submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties, the Court has gone through the contents of the
judgment as well as F.I.R. which was subject matter of the trial
including evidence of the P.W.2 who is informant. It appears that in
para 16 of the deposition the informant has stated that the accused
has light in his eye and he can drive and he also works in field. This
aspect of the matter has also been taken note by the learned court
in judgement dated 15.09.2018 in Sessions Trial No. 153 of 2018
thereafter the said direction was made against the petitioner. This is
not a case that the accused person was falsely implicated in the
case by the police. The police has investigated the matter and
submitted chargesheet thereafter the learned court has taken
cognizance and after facing the trial acquittal order has been passed
by the learned court. The petitioner has only investigated the
matter and submitted chargesheet. The direction issued against the
petitioner is unwarranted in absence of any cogent reason.
7. In that view of the matter that part of the judgment
whereby direction has been issued to the Superintendent of Police,
Godda to recover Rs. 1,00,000/- from the petitioner and to pay the
same in favour of accused Satya Narayan Sah and to initiate
departmental proceeding against him, are quashed.
8. This petition stands allowed in above terms and disposed
of. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Satyarthi/-
