Jharkhand High Court
Soumitra Dutt vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 June, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1402 of 2019
Soumitra Dutt, aged about 64 years, son of late Shyamal Kumar Dutt,
R/o K.P. Dutt Compound, Circular Road Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. -Lalpur,
District -Ranchi. .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Aniruddha Dutt, son of Shyamal Kumar Dutt, R/o Dutt Compound,
Circular Road Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. -Lalpur, District -Ranchi.
.... Opp. Parties
With
Cr.M.P. No. 2512 of 2021
Pradeep Kumar Verma, Aged about 32 years, Son of Late Vijay Verma,
Resident of Village -Bariyatu Basti, Near Alam Nursing Home, P.O. &
P.S. -Bariyatu, District -Ranchi.
.... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Anirudh Dutt, Son of Late Shyamal Kumar Dutt, Resident of 60,
Circular Road, K.P. Compound, P.O. & P.S. -Lalpur, District -Ranchi.
.... Opp. Parties
With
Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2021
Bimal Dutt @ Bimal Dutta, aged about 71 years, son of late Kshitiz
Chandra Dutt, R/o 2 B, Savitri Kunj, P.O. & P.S. -Lalpur, District -
Ranchi.
.... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Aniruddha Dutt, son of Shyamal Kumar Dutt, R/o -60 Circular
Road, K.P. Dutt Compound, Circular Road Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. -
Lalpur, District -Ranchi.
.... Opp. Parties
1
Cr.M.P. No.1402 of 2019
With
Cr.M.P. No. 2512 of 2021
With
Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2021
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioners : Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate
: Mr. Vishal Kr. Tiwary, Advocate
: Mr. Manjeet Kr. Choudhary, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P.
: Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, Addl. P.P.
: Mr. Sachin Kumar, AAG-II
: Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. P.P.N. Roy, Sr. Advocate
: Mr. Pandey A.N. Roy, Advocate
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. Since all the three criminal miscellaneous petitions have been filed
in respect of the same F.I.R. vide Lalpur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2018,
corresponding to G.R. No. 3463 of 2018, hence all the three criminal
miscellaneous petitions are disposed of by this common judgment.
3. These criminal miscellaneous petitions have been filed invoking
the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the
common prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including
the F.I.R. in connection with Lalpur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2018,
corresponding to G.R. No. 3463 of 2018 registered for the offences
punishable under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 509 & 120B
of the Indian Penal Code and in Cr.M.P. No. 1402 of 2019, an
additional prayer has been made for quashing the order dated
19.05.2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class,
Ranchi, whereby and where under the learned Magistrate invoked
the power under 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and directed for registration of
the F.I.R. Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2021 has been filed by Bimal Dutt @
With
With
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
Bimal Dutta with a prayer to quash the order dated 19.05.2018,
besides quashing the order dated 14.06.2021 by which non-bailable
warrant of arrest has been ordered to be issued against him.
4. The brief fact of the case is that the opposite party no.2-
complainant-informant of all the three cases filed Complaint Case
No. 1980 of 2018. He carried out some amendment in the original
Cr.M.P. and the case was fixed to 18.05.2018 vide order dated
17.05.2018 for recording of statement on solemn affirmation of the
complainant, but instead of the complainant getting his statement
recorded on solemn affirmation, as directed by the Judicial
Magistrate concerned, he filed a petition to refer the complaint under
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for institution of an F.I.R. and for investigation
of the case. Vide order dated 19.05.2018, the learned Magistrate
referred the said Complaint Case No. 1980 of 2018 for institution of
the F.I.R. and basing upon the said order, Lalpur P.S. Case No. 214 of
2018 has been registered and police took up investigation of the case.
Though the petitioner of Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2021 namely Bimal
Dutt @ Bimal Dutta was not the named accused person of the
complaint or the F.I.R. which has been registered on the basis of the
said complaint but during the course of the said investigation, the
I.O. of the case has found complicity of the petitioner in commission
of the offence and prayed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of
arrest against the petitioner and accordingly vide order dated
14.06.2021 in Lalpur P.S. Case No. 214 of 2018, the learned Judicial
Magistrate issued the non-bailable warrant of arrest.
With
With
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon the Judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s. SAS
Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Telangana & Anr., in Criminal
Appeal No. 2574 of 2024 arising out of Special Leave Petition
(Criminal) No. 2123 of 2024 dated 14.05.2024, para-8 of which reads
as under:-
"8. In view of the above, it is clear that when the
Magistrate in exercise of his judicial discretion directs
investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr. P.C., he cannot be
said to have taken cognizance of any offence. It is only when
the Magistrate after applying his mind prefers to follow the
procedure under Chapter XV of Cr.P.C. by resorting to
Sections 200, he can be said to have taken cognizance of the
offence." (Emphasis supplied)
Submits that since vide order dated 17.05.2018, the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Ranchi after applying his mind preferred to follow the
procedure under Chapter XV of the Cr.P.C. by resorting to Section
200 of the Cr.P.C., fixed the case for recording of the statement on
solemn affirmation, the same amounts to taking cognizance of the
offence and once the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the
offence, the order dated 19.05.2018 in the said complaint case is act of
directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. which is
not maintainable. Hence, the same be quashed and set aside.
6. The learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned senior
counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that if that is the
submission of the petitioners then in that case, in case the said order
dated 19.05.2018 is set aside, the entire criminal proceeding will not
With
With
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
come to an end rather it will revert to the stage at which it was on
18.05.2018 in Complaint Case No. 1980 of 2018.
7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials available in the record, this court has no
hesitation in holding that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the
case of M/s. SAS Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Telangana &
Anr. (supra) has in no uncertain manner held in paragraph no.7 and
8 of the said judgment relying upon the Judgment of Devarapalli
Lakshminarayana Reddy and Others Vs. Narayana Reddy and
Others, reported in (1976) 3 SCC 252 that when receiving a
complaint, the Magistrate applies his mind for the purposes of
proceeding under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the succeeding Sections in
Chapter -XV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he is said to have
taken cognizance of the offence within the meaning of Section 190
(1)(a) and the Magistrate is not competent to switch back to the pre-
cognizance stage and avail Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
8. In view of this settled principle of law, this Court has no hesitation
in holding that the learned Magistrate has committed a grave
illegality by though vide order dated 17.05.2018 has after application
of mind proceeded by resorting to Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., vide
subsequent order dated 19.05.2018, he committed a grave illegality in
switching back to the pre-cognizance stage and avail of Section
156(3) Cr.P.C.
With
With
( 2025:JHHC:19155 )
9. Accordingly, the order dated 19.05.2018, passed in Lalpur P.S. Case
No. 214 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 3463 of 2018 is quashed
and set aside.
10. Consequently, the entire criminal proceeding relating to Lalpur P.S.
Case No. 214 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 3463 of 2018
registered for the offences punishable under Section 419, 420, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506, 509 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code is also
quashed and set aside, including the order dated 14.06.2021 by
which non-bailable warrant of arrest has been ordered to be issued
against the petitioner of Cr.M.P. No. 2649 of 2021 and it is made clear
that the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Ranchi will proceed
with the Complaint Case No. 1908 of 2018 from the stage at which it
was on 18.05.2018.
11. All the three criminal miscellaneous petitions are disposed of
accordingly.
12. The interim relief granted earlier in all the three criminal
miscellaneous petitions is vacated.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 30th June, 2025
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
With
With
