Jharkhand High Court
Pramod Kumar Jaiswal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 January, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (Cr.) No.13 of 2025
------
Pramod Kumar Jaiswal, aged about 76 years, S/o Late Dashrath
Bhagat, R/o Jyoti Sangam Lane, Masjid lane, Upper Bazar, Ranchi,
P.O.- G.P.O, P.S.- Kotwali & District- Ranchi ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sidhartha Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Deepankar, AC to AG
------
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Writ Petition (Cr.) has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this
Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the
order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-V, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2023 whereby and
where under, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 362 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for correction of the name of the father of the
appellant of Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2023 from Dasrath Jaiswal to
Radheshyam Bhagat has been rejected by the learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-V, Ranchi but the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V,
Ranchi has failed to consider the second prayer in the application under
Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure dated 20.09.2024 as mentioned
in paragraph-9 as well as prayer portion of the said petition that the surname of
the opposite party No.2 before the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-
V, Ranchi be changed from Jiswal to Jaiswal.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment dated
18.01.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi in
Complaint Case No.1752 of 2009 read with the order dated 10.03.2023 in the
said complaint case by which the father's name of convict No.1 namely Ranjit
Kumar Jaiswal @ Ranjeet Prasad Jaiswal has been changed as Radheshyam
Bhagat instead of Dashrath Bhagat goes to show that inter alia the person
convicted in the said Complaint Case No.1752 of 2009 was Ranjit Kumar
Jaiswal son of Radheshyam Bhagat and not Ranjit Kumar Jaiswal son of
Dashrath Bhagat. Hence, the petitioner does not press the first prayer so far as
the quashing of the portion of the order relating to the prayer of change of
name of the father of the appellant No.1 of Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2023 from
Dashrath Bhagat to Radheshyam Bhagat with liberty to raise the plea before the
Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi that the said Criminal Appeal No.22
of 2023 itself is not maintainable having been filed by the appellant No.1 of that
appeal being a person who has not been convicted in the said Complaint Case
No.1752 of 2009, the judgment of which has been impugned in Criminal
Appeal No.22 of 2023.
4. It is next submitted that the order dated 29.11.2024 be set aside with a
direction to the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi or its
successor court to pass an appropriate order regarding the second prayer of the
petitioner to change his surname from Jiswal to Jaiswal.
5. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully
going through the materials available in the record, it is crystal clear from the
copy of the petition filed under Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
in Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2023 which has been numbered as M.C.A.
No.2130 of 2023 that though in para-9 of the said petition, it has categorically
been mentioned therein that the surname of the opposite party No.2 has
wrongly been mentioned as Jiswal in place of Jaiswal and the prayer has been
made in the said petition dated 20.09.2024 to correct the same but perusal of the
order dated 29.11.2024 reveals that the learned Additional Judicial
Commissioner-V, Ranchi has not passed any order regarding the second prayer
of the petitioner to change the surname as mentioned in the order dated
24.08.2024 in Misc. Criminal Application No.2130 of 2023, from Jiswal to
Jaiswal, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that certainly because of
the apparent overlooking of the prayer made by the petitioner, the learned
Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi has failed to pass any order
regarding the second prayer of the petitioner dated 29.11.2024 and has
committed an illegality by not passing any order in respect of the second
prayer of the petitioner, hence, this Writ Petition (Cr.) is disposed of with a
direction to the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi or its
successor court to pass an order regarding the second prayer of the writ
petitioner to change his surname from Jiswal to Jaiswal in the order dated
24.08.2024 in Misc. Criminal Application No.2130 of 2023, after giving
opportunity of being heard to all the parties before it in Criminal Appeal No.22
of 2023 and if such an order is passed, it will be treated to be the continuation
of the order dated 29.11.2024 passed in the said Misc. Criminal Application
No.2130 of 2023.
6. Liberty is also accorded to the petitioner to contend before the
Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi or its successor court that
Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2023 so far as it relates to the appellant No.1 of the
said appeal, is not maintainable having been filed against a person who has not
been convicted in the said Complaint Case No.1752 of 2009.
7. This Writ Petition (Cr.) is disposed of accordingly.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 22nd of January, 2025
AFR/ Animesh
