Jharkhand High Court
Rajesh Nath Goswami @ Rajeshnath ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 January, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
1 Cr.M.P. No.2427 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 2427 of 2023
Rajesh Nath Goswami @ Rajeshnath Goshwami, aged about 49 years,
son of late Premnath Goswami, resident of Village- Bantara, P.O. &
P.S.- Gola, Dist.- Ramgarh
.... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rita Devi, wife of Gopal Goswami, resident of Village- Bantara,
P.O. & P.S.- Gola, Dist.- Ramgarh
.... Opp. Parties
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, Addl. P.P.
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that he has
no instruction and the opposite party no.2 has taken the file from
him.
3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer
for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order
dated 08.02.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st
Class, Ramgarh in Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.342 of 2022 by
which the learned Magistrate has found prima facie case for the
offence punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of Indian Penal
Code against the petitioner.
4. The brief fact of the case is that on 11.10.2021 at about 05:00 pm,
the petitioner along with co-accused persons entered into the
house of the complainant and tried to commit rape upon her and
touched her private parts. When the daughter of the complainant
came to her rescue, the petitioner along with the co-accused with
an ill intention put their hand on the chest of the daughter of the
complainant causing hurt to her and making her fell down.
5. The complainant filed a written report basing upon which Gola
P.S. Case No. 127 of 2021 was registered. Police took up
investigation of the case and after completion of investigation as
from the CCTV footage of place of occurrence; at the relevant
time, the petitioner was not found present there and as the
labourers who were alleged to have seen the occurrence have
categorically stated before the police in their statement that the
allegation against the petitioner are entirely false hence, police
submitted a final report for lack of evidence and did not send up
the petitioner for trial.
6. Thereafter, the complainant filed protest petition and basing
upon the same, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the
offence punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of Indian Penal
Code as already indicated above.
7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by
drawing attention of this Court to page no.61 of the brief which is
undisputedly the report submitted jointly by the complainant, her
daughter and her husband, contending therein that on 11.10.2021
at about 04:25 pm, the petitioner assaulted the husband of the
complainant and pressed his neck and when the daughter of the
complainant went to the rescue of her father, the petitioner
assaulted her which caused injuries to her and in the process she
also fell down and when the complainant came to their rescue, the
petitioner and the co-accused persons also assaulted her. Drawing
attention of this Court to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in the case of Krishna Lal Chawla & Ors. vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in (2021) 5 SCC 435, the relevant
portion of paragraph no. 15 of which reads as under:-
"15. Xxxx xxxx xxxx
Respondent 2's conduct in filing a delayed complaint
case, suppressing material facts, and utilising fresh
proceedings to materially improve on his earlier version,
in totality, amounts to gross abuse of the process of
court."
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
conduct of the complainant in filing the FIR belatedly on
17.10.2021 suppressing the material facts and utilizing the fresh
written report to materially improve on her earlier version
submitted to police on 11.10.2021 on the date of alleged
occurrence itself amount to gross abuse of the process of court and
on this score alone the entire criminal proceeding be quashed and
set aside.
8. Relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in the case of Vineet Kumar & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh &
Anr. reported in (2017) 13 SCC 369 paragraph no. 41 of which
reads as under:-
"41. Inherent power given to the High Court under
Section 482 CrPC is with the purpose and object of
advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court
is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique
motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very
threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go
on if the case falls in one of the categories as
illustratively enumerated by this Court in State of
Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal,
1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] . Judicial
process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed
to be converted into an instrument of operation or
harassment. When there are materials to indicate that a
criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala
fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in
exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to
quash the proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated
in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v.
Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri)
426] , which is to the following effect: (SCC p. 379, para
102)
"102. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding
is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view
to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
Above Category 7 is clearly attracted in the facts of
the present case. Although, the High Court has
noted the judgment of State of Haryana v. Bhajan
Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1)
SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] , but did not advert
to the relevant facts of the present case, materials on
which final report was submitted by the IO. We,
thus, are fully satisfied that the present is a fit case
where the High Court ought to have exercised its
jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and quashed
the criminal proceedings."
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
High Court in exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has
to thwart the attempt of any person who seeks to abuse the
solemn process of the court with some oblique motive at the very
threshold itself and it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that from the facts of the case, it is crystal clear that
because of admitted facts that the petitioner is the agnate of the
complainant hence, false criminal prosecution has been lodged
against them for wreaking vengeance.
9. Relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in the case of Rajiv Thapar & Ors. vs. Madan Lal Kapoor
reported in (2013) 3 SCC 330, the relevant portion of paragraph
no.29 of which reads as under:-
"29. Xxxx xxxx xxxx
To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482
CrPC the High Court has to be fully satisfied that the
material produced by the accused is such that would
lead to the conclusion that his/their defence is based on
sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts; the material
produced is such as would rule out and displace the
assertions contained in the charges levelled against the
accused; and the material produced is such as would
clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations
contained in the accusations levelled by the
prosecution/complainant.
Xxxx xxxx xxxx"
10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as is
evident from the first report submitted by the complainant to the
police on the alleged date of occurrence i.e. on 11.10.2021 itself
goes to show that the petitioner has produced material which
would lead to the conclusion that his defence is based on sound,
reasonable and indubitable facts and such material would rule out
and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled
against the petitioner and the final report which has reference to
the CCTV footage and the statement of the witnesses recorded by
the public servant- police officer clearly reject and overrule the
veracity of the allegation contained in the acquisitions levelled
against the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that continuation of
the criminal proceeding against the petitioner will about to abuse
of process of law; hence the entire criminal proceeding including
the order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Ramgarh in Protest-cum-Complaint Case
No.342 of 2022 be quashed and set aside.
11. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand opposes the prayer to
quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated
08.02.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,
Ramgarh in Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.342 of 2022 and
submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the
petitioner of having committed the offences in respect of which
prima facie case has been found by the learned Magistrate. It is
lastly submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being
without any merit be dismissed.
12. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here
that it remains undisputed that the complainant on 11.10.2021 has
submitted a written application to police and she herself in
paragraph no.6 of the statement in solemn affirmation has
admitted the same. So admittedly, the subsequent written report
which has been treated as the FIR of Gola P.S. Case No. 127 of
2021 submitted on 17.10.2021 is the second written report in
respect of the same occurrence which is certainly hit by Section
162 Cr.P.C. By the written report submitted on 17.10.2021, the
complainant has built up an entirely different case than the one
contended in her first written report submitted to police
immediately after the alleged occurrence on 11.10.2021. Police
during the investigation of the case on the basis of the CCTV
footage and statement of the witnesses; who were claiming to be
the eye witness of the occurrence by the complainant have found
the allegation against the petitioner to be not true and their
presence were not found at the place of occurrence at the time of
alleged occurrence. The mobile tower location of the petitioner
goes to show that he was not present at the alleged place of
occurrence at the time of occurrence.
13. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view
that continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner
will amount to abuse of process of law and this criminal
prosecution has been lodged against the petitioner for wreaking
vengeance. Hence, this is a fit case where the entire criminal
proceeding including the order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ramgarh in Protest-cum-
Complaint Case No.342 of 2022 be quashed and set aside qua the
petitioner only.
14. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order
dated 08.02.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st
Class, Ramgarh in Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.342 of 2022 is
quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only.
15. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 10th January, 2024
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
