Jharkhand High Court
Farheen Siddiqui Qamar @ Farheen ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 October, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
(2025:JHHC:32446)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1514 of 2020
1. Farheen Siddiqui Qamar @ Farheen Siddiqui, aged about 29 years,
wife of Aftab Qamar and daughter of Afsaruddin Siddiqui
2. Afsaruddin Sidiqui, aged about 55 years, son of late Misbahuddin
Sidiqui
3. Seema Parween, aged about 51 years, wife of Afsaruddin Siddiqui
4. Gufran Siddqui, aged about 18 years,
5. Farhan Siddiqui, aged about 22 years
6. Babu Siddiqui @ Farazuddin Siddiqi (Babu), aged about 25 years
Sl. No.4 to 6 all sons of Afsaruddin Siddiqui
Sl. No.1 to 6 all residents of 95/25, Farras Khana, Nai Sadak, P.O. &
P.S.-Bekangunj, Dist.-Kanpur, Uttar Pardesh-208001
.... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Md. Nezam, son of Mr. Moula Bakhsh, aged about 62 years,
presently residing at Islam Nagar, P.O.-Kapali, P.S.-Chandil, Dist.-
Seraikella, Kharsawan
.... Opp. Parties
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioners : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.
For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Niranjan Singh, Advocate
: Mr. Hatim, Advocate
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with the
prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order
(2025:JHHC:32446)
dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum in connection with C-1 Case No. 2142
of 2017 whereby and whereunder, the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum has taken cognizance for
the offences punishable under Section 323, 341, 504, 427/34 of Indian
Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 being
the daughter-in-law of the complainant and the petitioner nos.2 to 6
being the relatives of the petitioner no.1 have invited the
complainant for a discussion, in the Jubilee Park and assaulted him
and committed theft of his money from his pocket and broke his
spectacle.
4. On the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant on
solemn affirmation and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum has
found prima facie case for the said offences, as already indicated
above and passed orders for issue of summons to the petitioners.
5. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in the case of Neelu Chopra & Anr. vs. Bharti reported in (2009) 10
SCC 184, paragraph no.9 of which reads as under:-
''9. In order to lodge a proper complaint, mere mention of the
sections and the language of those sections is not the be all
and end all of the matter. What is required to be brought to
the notice of the court is the particulars of the offence
committed by each and every accused and the role played by
each and every accused in committing of that offence.''
it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is
absolutely no material in the record to suggest the particulars of the
offence committed by each of the petitioners and admittedly
(2025:JHHC:32446)
petitioner no.1 instituted a case involving the offence punishable
under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code against the complainant
and his family members and for wreaking vengeance, this false case
has been foisted.
6. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that
the trial has not yet begun and the case is at the stage of appearance.
It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that
the allegations against the petitioners are all false and concocted as
well as vague and vexatious. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as
prayed for in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.
7. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently opposes the
prayer and submits that the allegation made against the petitioners
are sufficient to constitute each of the offences for which cognizance
has been taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur,
East Singhbhum. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal
miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed.
8. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here
that the undisputed fact remains that the petitioner no.1 first
instituted Bekangunj P.S. Case No. 102 of 2017 in the District of
Kanpur Town in the State of Uttar Pradesh on 2016-17. Admittedly,
all the petitioners are resident of Kanpur in the State of Uttar
Pradesh. The complainant is a resident of Chandil in Seraikella-
Karsawan. There is no explanation as to what was the occasion for
the persons to assemble at Jubilee Park in Jamshedpur. The
(2025:JHHC:32446)
complainant himself has not taken any name of any accused persons,
of having done any specific act. It is not forthcoming as to who
caused hurt to the complainant. There is no specific allegation as to
who wrongfully restrained the complainant nor there is any specific
allegation as to who did the mischief. Under such circumstances, this
Court has no hesitation in holding that from reading between the
lines, it is crystal clear that this case has falsely been foisted for
wreaking vengeance to counter the earlier case instituted by the
petitioner no.1 against the complainant and his family members vide
Bekangunj P.S. Case No. 102 of 2017.
9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that
continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioners will
amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the
entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 16.02.2018
passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, East
Singhbhum in connection with C-1 Case No. 2142 of 2017 be quashed
and set aside.
10. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order
dated 16.02.2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum in connection with C-1 Case No. 2142
of 2017 is quashed and set aside.
11. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 29th October, 2025
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
Uploaded on 31/10/2025
