Jharkhand High Court
Chhotu Prasad @ Chotu Kumar Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand And Another .... ... on 29 January, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
Cr.M.P. No. 375 of 2018
----
1.Chhotu Prasad @ Chotu Kumar Prasad
2.Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar
3.Rohit Kumar .... Petitioners
-- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand and Another .... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Akashdeep, Advocate
Ms.Priti Priyamvada, Advocate
Mr. Divyashree, Advocate
For the State :- Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Advocate
----
13/29.01.2024 On repeated call nobody has responded on behalf of the
O.P.No.2 although the appearance on behalf of the O.P.No.2 has been made.
Identical was the situation on 15.02.2023 when the matter was adjourned
with a view to provide one more opportunity to the O.P.No.2. The matter was
again adjourned on 20.09.2023, 7.11.2023, 30.11.2023 and 07.12.2023. On
22.01.2024 again the matter was adjourned with a view to provide one more
opportunity to the O.P.No.2 and in spite of that, nobody has appeared on
behalf of the O.P.No.2 and accordingly, this matter is being heard in absence
of the O.P.No.2.
2. Heard Mr. Akash Deep, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners as well as Mrs. Priya Shrestha, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent State.
3. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire
criminal proceeding including the order dated 08.08.2017 in connection
protest cum complaint case no.159 of 2017 (Balumath P.S. Case No.51 of
2016) pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar.
4. Balumath P.S. Case No.51 of 2016 was registered alleging
therein that on the date of occurrence accused Deepak Kumar Jaishwal was
not present at Chatra rather he had gone to Adityapur, Saraikella for
admission of his son Akash Kumar Jaishwal and this fact came in evidence
collected by the I.O. in the case diary who was obtained excepts of
admission register of D.A.V Public School, NIT Campus, Adityapur,
Jamshedpur. The admission number of Akash Kumar Jaishwal is 9970 dated
08.04.2016. In the admission register petitioner no.2 Deepak Kumar Jaishwal
has put his signature as father of Akash Kumar Jaishwal. Besides the I.O has
been also collected mobile location of the other accused on the date of
occurrence which suggest that the accused persons were not present near
the place of occurrence. The petitioner no.1 Chhotu Prasad who is owner and
driver of Truck registration no.JH02D-6644 was present at the Godown of
B.S.F.C. Chatra at the S.W.C. Tapej from 1.30 p.m to 5.00 p.m and in this
regard certificate has been issued by BSFC Chatra.
5. Mr. Akashdeep, the learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that on 16.02.2016 Mahila P.S. Case No.6 of 2016 has been
instituted by daughter of petitioner no.1 and sister of petitioner nos.2 and 3
in which O.P.no.2 who happened to be her sister in law was also made
accused. He submits that after much delay on 08.04.2016 the FIR was
instituted making allegation of assault outraging modesty of O.P.No.2 which
was found false by police and in course of investigation resulting in
submission of final form and on protest petition cognizance was taken
punishable under sections 323, 341, 354/34 IPC. He further submits that as
a retaliation of Mahila P.S. Case No.6 of 2016, the daughter of petitioner no.1
subsequently instituted this case against the petitioners which is a malicious
prosecution and in view of that this Court may kindly quash the entire
criminal proceeding. He futher submits that earlier also the complaint case
no.865 of 2017 has been filed. The petitioners were made accused however
by order dated 07.07.2022 they have been acquitted. The said order has
been brought on record by way of filing supplementary affidavit. He submits
that the learned court on protest petition has taken cognizance.
6. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, the learned State counsel submits that
final form is there however the learned court on protest petition has taken
cognizance.
7. It is an admitted position that earlier the case has been filed
by the daughter of the petitioner no.1 being Mahila P.S. Case No.6 of 2016
on 16.02.2016 and the present case is filed on 08.04.2016 and the police
investigated the matter and submitted final form saying that all the accused
were not present and in view of that the petitioners were not sent up for trial
and on protest petition, the learned court has taken cognizance. The
relationship of Shashi Kumar Bhagat, Madhuri Kumari has come to an end in
view of the judgment dated 28.09.2021 on mutual consent in Original Suit
No.25 of 2009 by order of Principal Judge, Family Court, Chatra.
8. In view of above and considering that by way of retaliation
the case has been filed and police has already investigated the matter and
nothing has been found against these petitioners and on the protest petition
the learned court has taken cognizance, hence, the entire criminal
proceeding including the order dated 08.08.2017 in connection protest cum
complaint case no.159 of 2017 (Balumath P.S. Case No.51 of 2016) pending
in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar is quahed.
9. This petition is allowed and disposed of.
10. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
