RANCHI, India, Nov. 22 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Oct. 22:

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 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 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 SeraikellaKarsawan.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=U%2BbhtlrLe2adAHN8Tz%2F1d5UN9GRgEnKPHqOmUnIIeWfyV8bnOdiTXHYrwKWopSGp&caseno=Cr.M.P./1514/2020&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010140802020&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.