Allowed

Sukra Munda Alias Dukhu Munda And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC30 Nov 2018Cr.M.P./90/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench of the High Court of Jharkhand allowed an application for quashing criminal proceedings initiated for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The court held that since the dispute between the related parties was settled and the prosecution was abandoned by the informant, continuing the trial was an exercise in futility.

What did the court decide?

Entire criminal proceedings in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No. 132/2015 and corresponding G.R. Case No. 386/2015, including the order dated 07.09.2015, quashed and set aside.

Sukra Munda Alias Dukhu Munda And Ors. Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No. 90 of 2017

¶3

Sukra Munda @ Dukhu Munda @ Sukhu Munda @ Dukhu

¶4

Sohrai Munda

¶5

Mangru Munda

¶6

Chunda Munda @ Chundu Munda @ Chanda Munda ... … Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand

¶9

Smt. Asha Guria ... … Opposite Parties

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶11

For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Advocate

¶12

04/30.11.2018 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2.

¶13

In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No. 132/2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 386/2015, including the order dated 07.09.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti by which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 420/ 403/468/120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that both the warring parties are related to each other and at the behest of the well wishers they have settled their disputes and the opposite party no. 2 does not want to proceed further with the criminal prosecution of the petitioner.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has echoed the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶16

A First Information Report was instituted with the allegations that the father of the informant had died 10 years ago and her mother used to stay alone. It has been alleged that the land which belonged to the parents of the informant

¶17

-2-

¶18

were acquired by the Govt. of Jharkhand for which a compensation amount of Rs. 37,00,000/- was received. Allegation has been levelled that a cheque was taken by the petitioner no. 1 and was misappropriated by the accused persons. It has further been alleged that only an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- was handed over to the informant which she distributed amongst her sisters. In spite of the request made by the informant to handover 50% of the amount as she is the daughter and she is looking after the mother the accused persons did not pay heed to her request and got the amount deposited in their respective accounts.

¶19

Based on the aforesaid allegations Khunti P.S. Case No. 132/2015 was instituted in which after investigation chargesheet was submitted leading to taking of cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 420/ 403/ 468/ 120(B) / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

During the pendency of the criminal case the matter appears to have been compromised between the parties and an application was also preferred before the learned court below to compound the offence in view of the fact that both the parties are related to each other who have settled their disputes and the opposite party no. 2 does not have any grievance against the petitioners.

¶21

In view of the nature of offence and the fact that the parties have compromised the dispute amongst themselves as would be evident from the application preferred by the opposite party no. 2 and the submission advanced by the learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 it would be an exercise in futility to continue with the criminal prosecution of the petitioners.

¶22

Accordingly, in view of what has been stated above, this application stands allowed and the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No. 132/2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 386/2015, including the order dated 07.09.2015 passed by learned Chief

¶23

-3-

¶24

Judicial Magistrate, Khunti by which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 420/ 403/468/120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶25

This application stands allowed.

¶26

(R. Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶27

Alok/-

Sukra Munda Alias Dukhu Munda And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukra Munda Alias Dukhu Munda And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sham Mohammad Sheikh Vs State of Jharkhand

M/S.Snl Bearing Ltd. And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Debesh Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Dr. Rajeev Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ali Raza Zaidi Vs State of Jharkhand

Gopal Krishna Mattoo Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy Commissioner And Ors.