Jharkhand High Court
Punam Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand on 29 October, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
[2025:JHHC:32619]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No.1909 of 2025
------
1. Punam Kumari, aged about 48 years, D/o Late Adhik Lal
Pandit, W/o Shri Amardeep Kumar Prajapati, R/o Dangra
Toli, Middle lane, P.S.- Lower Bazar, P.O.- G.P.O., District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand PIN - 834001.
2. Amardeep Kumar Prajpati, aged about 58 years, S/o Late
Jagdish Ram Prajapati, R/o Dangra Toli, Middle Lane, P.S.-
Lower Bazar, P.O.- G.P.O., District- Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN -
834001.
3. Manorma Devi, aged about 67 years, W/o Late Adhik Lal
Pandit, R/o. Ward No.2, Near Hanuman Mandir, Akada,
Barmasiya, P.S. & P.O. Deoghar, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand
- 814112.
4. Kishor Kumar, aged about 40 years, S/o Late Adhik Lal
Pandit, R/o Ward No.2, Near Hanuman Mandir Akada,
Barmasiya, P.S. & P.O. Deoghar, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand
- 814112.
5. Nisha Bharti, aged about 43 years, D/o Late Adhik Lal Pandit,
R/o Near Beema Kunj H. No. 166 K, C - Sector Sarvdharm
Colony, Kolar Road, P.S.- Kolar, P.O. - Danish Kunj Bhopal,
Madhya Pradesh - 462042.
... Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Sanjay Kumar Prajapati @ Shambu, aged about 46 years, S/o
Late Bhuneshwar Ram, R/o Dangra Toli, Middle Lane, P.S. -
Lower Bazar, P.O.- G.P.O., District- Ranchi, Jharkhand, PIN -
834001
... Opposite Parties
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Yashdeep Kanhai, Advocate
[2025:JHHC:32619]
Mr. Saurav Jha, Advocate
Ms. Divya Choudhary, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P.
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Abhinay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Tamal Choudhary, Advocate
Mr. Rishi Ranjan Vats, Advocate
------
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the
prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings and the First Information
Report in connection with Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.224 of 2021
corresponding to G.R. Case No.614 of 2025 wherein the learned Judicial
Magistrate-1st Class- XXVIII, Ranchi vide order dated 21.02.2025 has taken
cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and passed summoning order against the petitioners.
3. The brief fact of the case is that police after investigation of Lower
Bazar P.S. Case No.224 of 2021, submitted charge sheet inter alia against the
petitioners for committing the said offences and on the basis of the same
vide impugned order dated 21.02.2025, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st
Class- XXVIII, Ranchi has taken cognizance of the offences and passed
summoning order against the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.2
has received summons from the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi and the
next date is fixed to 10.11.2025 for appearance of the petitioners. It is next
[2025:JHHC:32619]
submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false. This is a
counter-case of Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.222 of 2021. It is then submitted
that the allegations against the petitioners are malicious in nature and this is
a malicious prosecution against the petitioners. It is also submitted that the
charge sheet was submitted only in the year 2025 though the case was
registered in the year 2021.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vakil Prasad Singh Vs. State
of Bihar reported in (2009) 3 SCC 355 and submits that the right to speedy
trial in all criminal prosecutions is an inalienable right under Article 21 of
the Constitution.
6. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
the case of State of Haryana & Others Vs. Bhajan Lal & Others reported in
1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in
para-102(7) of which, it has been held that the power under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure which corresponds to under Section 528 of
the B.N.S.S., 2023 can be exercised 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. In this respect learned counsel for the petitioners further relies
upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Limited & Another vs. Rajiv
Dubey reported in (2009) 1 SCC 706. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer
as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed.
[2025:JHHC:32619]
7. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for
the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of
the petitioners made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and submit
that it is a settled principle of law that a case and a counter-case can go
together. It is next submitted that whether a prosecution is a malicious or
not can be determined only by the trial of the case. It is also submitted that
the grounds upon which the petitioners seek quashing of the entire criminal
proceedings are at best the defence of the petitioners, which can only be
taken during the trial of the case but certainly the same is not a ground to
quash the entire criminal proceedings. Hence, it is submitted that this
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed.
8. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after
carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court
finds that the undisputed fact remains that there was a case and counter-
case in respect of the same occurrence and police after investigation of the
case, found the allegations against the petitioners of having committed the
offences punishable under Section 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code. It is not even the case of the petitioners that if the allegations made
against them are considered to be true; the same will not constitute the
offences in respect of which the charge sheet has been submitted and basing
upon which, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXVIII, Ranchi has
taken cognizance.
9. It is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerela &
Others reported in (2006) 6 SCC 181 that if the second or successive FIR is a
[2025:JHHC:32619]
counter-case in connection with the same or connected cognizable offences,
the same is not hit by the provisions of Section 162 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and both the case and the counter-case are to be investigated
further. Hence, this Court do not find any justifiable reason to quash the
entire criminal proceedings only because the FIR of Lower Bazar P.S. Case
No.224 of 2021 is a counter-case of Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.222 of 2021.
10. It is also a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs.
Aryan Singh & Others reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 379, para-11 of
which reads as under:-
11. One another reason pointed by the High Court is that the initiation
of the criminal proceedings/proceedings is malicious. At this stage, it is
required to be noted that the investigation was handed over to the CBI
pursuant to the directions issued by the High Court. That thereafter, on
conclusion of the investigation, the accused persons have been
chargesheeted. Therefore, the High Court has erred in observing at this
stage that the initiation of the criminal proceedings/proceedings is
malicious.Whether the criminal proceedings was/were malicious or not,
is not required to be considered at this stage. The same is required to be
considered at the conclusion of the trial. In any case, at this stage, what
is required to be considered is a prima facie case and the material
collected during the course of the investigation, which warranted the
accused to be tried." (Emphasis supplied)
that whether the criminal proceedings were malicious is not required
to be considered at the initial stage and the same is required to be
considered at the time of conclusion of the trial.
11. The contention of the petitioners that the allegations against the
petitioners are false, can only be determined after the full-dress trial of the
case. It is settled principle of law that the defence of the accused person of
the case or the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused cannot be
considered by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section
[2025:JHHC:32619]
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as that would be job of the trial
court, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Others reported in
2004 2 Supreme 501.
12. So far as the contention of the petitioners that there was a delay in
submission of charge sheet is concerned, it is a settled principle of law that
mere delay in investigation of the case is certainly not a ground to quash the
entire criminal proceeding; more so, when the charge sheet has already
been submitted. The learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class- XXVIII, Ranchi
has taken cognizance of the offences for which the charge sheet was
submitted and though the petitioner was aware that the charge sheet has
been submitted and the cognizance has been taken against them, they
themselves have avoided appearing before the trial court for more than six
months without any plausible reason.
13. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that
there is absolutely no merit in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed
invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.,
2023.
14. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any
merit, is dismissed.
15. In view of disposal of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition,
Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of being infructuous.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 29th of October, 2025
AFR/ Saroj
[2025:JHHC:32619]
Uploaded on 01/11/2025
