Dismissed

MD Hasim v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Feb 2020Cr.M.P./42/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an order taking cognizance under Sections 341, 323, 379/34 IPC. The court held that allegations of assault and theft established a prima-facie case, dismissing the petitioners' contention regarding a retaliatory Section 498A complaint filed later.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was dismissed; the order taking cognizance was upheld; no merit was found in the prayer for quashing.

MD Hasim Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No. 42 of 2020

¶3

Md. Hashim

¶4

Nasri Parween

¶5

Nazia Parween

¶6

Md. Pappu @ Md. Farooque

¶7

Md. Alam @ Alam

¶8

Ruby Parween…..…....... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand & Anr………… Opp. Party(s)

¶9

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶10

…… For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Kr. Sinah, Advocate For the State : A.P.P.

¶11

4/04.02.2020 Heard the parties.

¶12

In this application, the petitioners pray for quashing the order dated 24.05.2019, by which cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379/34 I.P.C. has been taken and, thereafter, summons have been issued to the petitioners.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is dispute between the husband and the wife for which the husband has lodged this case against the wife and others. He submits that the wife had already filed a complaint under Section 498 A IPC, which was registered as Giridih Sadar Mahila P.S. Case No. 13 of 2018. He submits that the said complaint was filed on 23.06.2018, but surprisingly the FIR was registered on 04.08.2018. He submits that the complaint, which has been filed by the husband, is nothing but by way of retaliation of the said FIR, lodged by the wife.

¶14

Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer and submits that the impugned order is a well reasoned order, which reflects materials against each of the persons. After going through the impugned order, I find that there is allegation that on 24.06.2018 the accused persons entered into the house of the complainant and thereafter, they started assaulting the complainant. There is specific allegation against accused nos. 5, 6 & 7 and others that they broke the locker after entering into the room and taken away jewelries and then left.

¶15

The aforesaid occurrence definitely makes out a case to take cognizance. The allegations are not improbable and at the stage of cognizance the truthfulness also cannot be evaluated. The Court below considered all the aspects and by a reasoned order have taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 341, 323, 379/34 I.P.C.

¶16

-2-

¶17

So far as the contention of the petitioners that the wife had already filed a case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, I find that the said case has been registered on 04.08.2018, i.e. much after the present complaint, which was filed on 27.06.2018.

¶18

Since, prima-facie case is made out for which cognizance has been taken, I am not inclined to interfere with the same. Accordingly, having found no merit, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands dismissed.

¶19

Mukund/-cp.3

MD Hasim v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Hasim 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

Dharmendra Kumar Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Verma Alias Amit Verma Vs State of Jharkhand

Samim Akhtar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Babita Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Umesh Kumar Bajpayee Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Dharmendra Kumar  Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Verma Alias Amit Verma Vs State of Jharkhand

Samim Akhtar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Babita Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Umesh Kumar Bajpayee Vs State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.