High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a quashing application filed by Seven petitioners who sought termination of criminal proceedings alleging retaliatory filing.
The application for quashing the entire criminal proceedings is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 2283 of 2017
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Jit, A.P.P.
02/05.09.2017 Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Shailendra Jit, learned A.P.P. for the State.
In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Telaiya P.S. Case No. 79 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 240 of 2017, pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Koderma.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that earlier Telaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of 2017 was instituted in which the petitioners were granted bail and only by way of retaliation another case was instituted being Telaiya P.S.
-2-
Case No. 79 of 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the earlier case which also related to outraging of modesty final form has been submitted by the Police. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the subsequent First Information Report thus proves the malicious prosecution against the petitioners.
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer made by the petitioners and has submitted that although the outraging of modesty is common with respect to both the First Information Reports but the dates mentioned in the First Information Reports are different so it cannot be said that the subsequent First Information Report is merely a recital of the earlier First Information Report.
The allegations made in both the First Information Reports do seem to be outraging of modesty but it cannot be said at this stage that merely because the petitioners had been granted bail another First Information Report had been instituted levelling same and similar allegations. The investigation is at its nascent stage and only because final form has been submitted in Telaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of 2017 the same cannot be a tool for quashing the subsequent proceedings as has been prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Since there appears to be a prima facie case made out against the petitioners as per the First Information Report I am not inclined to entertain this application, which is accordingly dismissed.
(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)
Alok/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings in the quashing application should be dismissed on the facts as alleged by the petitioners.
Chhotelal Singh and others
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
