JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON SHRAWAN KUMAR V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR

RANCHI, India, Jan. 23 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Dec. 22:

1. Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 29.06.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No.144 of 2020 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XXI, Ranchi whereby and where under learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XXI, Ranchi dismissed the said criminal revision filed against the order dated 05.02.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No.3156 of 2019 arising out of Complaint Case No.1702 of 2015 whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi rejected the prayer of the accused person for summoning Advocate Shri Jai Shankar Prasad as a witness in the case and also to prove certain documents, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi considered that the substance of acquisition explained to the petitioner was under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner has been filed at least three different petitions all the three petitions invoking the jurisdiction of the trial court under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. and as the case was at the stage of examination of prosecution witness, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi observed that the accused petitioner shall have adequate opportunity to place their grievance at appropriate stage and rejected the petition. The learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XXI, Ranchi considered that the Advocate Jai Shankar Prasad has not been cited as a witness in the complaint and there is no whisper about Jai Shankar Prasad anywhere in the complainant. It further considered that, the defence, though was given several opportunities to adduce evidence, but did not adduce any evidence and the documents sought to be proved were public documents, therefore, there is no necessity of examination of any witness to get the same exhibited and not finding any illegality in the impugned order dismissed the Criminal Revision.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the orders passed by the learned Original Court as well as the learned Revisional Court are not legal and therefore are not sustainable in law. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

4. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that there is no illegality in the orders passed, as the said Jai Shankar Prasad is a stranger to the case and nowhere there is any averment in the complaint regarding him nor it has been mentioned in the petition under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for what purpose, the examination of Advocate Jai Shankar Prasad is relevant, for the just decision of the case. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

5. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ratanlal vs. Prahlad Jat & Others reported in (2017) 9 SCC 340 that the power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised with caution and circumspection and only for strong and valid reasons.

6. Now coming to the facts of the case, the petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. does not disclose as to how the evidence of Advocate Shri Jai Shankar Prasad is relevant though his name does not appear anywhere in the complaint. In the absence of the same, obviously there was inadequate material for the learned court below to come to the conclusion that the evidence sought to be introduced through the said witness, is essential for the just decision of the case and the said Jai Shankar Prasad was not present in the Court also when the prayer was made.

7. Under such circumstances, this Court do not find any illegality in the order dated 05.02.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No.3156 of 2019 arising out of Complaint Case No.1702 of 2015 or for that matter in the order dated 29.06.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No.144 of 2020 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XXI, Ranchi warranting interference of this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

8. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.