Dismissed

Satish Kumar Ravi v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC19 May 2023Cr.M.P./325/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, petitioner sought quashing of an FIR alleging forceful entry into a flat. The court dismissed the petition, noting serious violence allegations and rejecting the land-dispute defense.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing of the FIR and criminal proceedings dismissed. Pending interlocutory applications dismissed.

Satish Kumar Ravi Vs The State Of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr.M.P. No. 325 of 2017

¶3

Satish Kumar Ravi ..... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Dipanita Chaturvedi ..... … Opposite Parties -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Antariksh Narayan, Advocate. ------

¶4

05/ 19.05.2023 Heard Mr. Eqbal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Vardhan, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2.

¶5

This petition has been filed for quashing of the First Information Report and the entire criminal proceeding, in connection with Lower Bazar P.S. Case No. 235 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 5347 of 2014, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶6

The prosecution case was based on written report of the informant /Opp. Party No.2 recorded on 19.09.2014 wherein, she has stated that she stays at tenanted flat No.601, Gharaunda Apartment, Dangratoli Chowk since 2001. She further stated that on 10.09.2014 when she was in her flat then all of a sudden at about 20.17 P.M. about 6/7 persons forcibly entered into her flat armed with several weapons, threatening her that they will forcibly throw her out from her flat and at that time, the landlord's husband namely S.K. Ravi accompanied by the 6/7 persons some of them armed and even S.D.M. Ravi was also threatening and abusing her. She further alleged that since her husband and her sons do not stay with her and as such, I she was all alone in the house, so after this incident she immediately gave a written complaint to S.D.M. Ranchi and Lower Bazar Police. She further alleged that on 11 th September at about 13.00 hours Vishwajeet Ravi was supposed to see the copy of the agreement with her wife and compared it with the landlady. When her husband told him to meet he said I do not want to see you. I will register a case under Harijans Act against you and once again S.K. Ravi and he called me on mobile and threatened. She further alleged that on 15.09.2014, in between 15.30 hours to 16.00 hours, when she was taking bath, then all of a sudden, she heard noise of several persons and also heard that certain things are being broken. Since she was all alone in her

¶7

-2-

¶8

house, she did not open the door but ultimately they succeeded in breaking open the lock of the door and about 30/40 females and certain male forcibly entered into her flat and broken all house articles. She further alleged that all these women and men forcibly dragged her in a half naked condition from 6" Floor to ground floor. She further alleged that they snatched away her mobile phone, her car keys of both Honda City and Nano and there was hard cash of Rs.28,000/= and a gold Omega Watch of her late father-in-law. Thereafter her husband returned and he saw her in the ground floor in a pathetic and injured condition having bruise in every part of her body, her husband tried to save her but he too was brutally assaulted by these women as well as Mr. S. K. Ravi. She further alleged that S.K. Ravi and his mob were manhandling her and were assaulting her and using criminal force to outrage her modesty. She further alleged that when she asked Mr. S. K. Ravi that why he is doing all, then he replied since she is not vacating the flat, so they are doing all these things. She further alleged that the way, they assaulted her husband clearly goes to show that they had the intention to commit murder of her husband as they were carrying deadly weapon, such as Bhala, pistol, sword and Lathi. She further alleged that she seriously apprehend that these persons including Mr. S.K. Ravi and his wife may repeat the incident again, leading to lodgment of the case.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is a lease agreement between wife of the petitioner and the O.P. No. 2 with regard to the premises. He further submits that the rent was not being paid by the O.P. No. 2, that’s why the wife of the petitioner filed the appropriate petition before the court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate-cumRent Controller, Ranchi for eviction of the premises and also for recovery of rent, in which, the order was passed to pay the arrears of rent and also vacate the premises. He further submits that in this background only as a counter blast, the present case has been filed and in that view of the matter entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed. To buttress his argument, he relied in the case of Usha Chakraborty & Anr. Versus State of West Bengal & Anr ., reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 67 .

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 submits that there is allegation of destroying the articles kept in the house and that to at a time when nobody was present in the house and only a lady was present there. On this ground, he submits that the case

¶11

-3-

¶12

may kindly be dismissed.

¶13

In view of the above, it appears that there is a lease agreement between the wife of the petitioner and the O.P. No. 2 and if the order was there for eviction, the petitioner was required to take action in accordance with law and law does not authorize anybody to throw any person by way of using force. The court after looking into the contents of the FIR, finds that there is allegation that on 15.09.2014 at about 13:00 hours, when the informant taking bath, then all of a sudden, she heard the noise of several persons and also heard that certain things are being broken and when the O.P. No. 2 immediately came out of the bathroom, though she was not properly dressed, then at the relevant point of time, several persons are forcibly trying to open the door and they succeeded in breaking the door and about 30-40 persons forcibly entered into the flat of the O.P. No. 2 and they broke the furniture items i.e. T.V. stand, T.V., Microwave and threw certain furniture from the 6^th floor to the ground floor and broke them. With all these allegations the FIR has been lodged.

¶14

In view of the above, it appears that there are materials against the petitioner and the judgment, relied upon by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is not in dispute, however, in the case in hand, there is serious allegation against the petitioner that also by way of using force, they have tried to put harm to the informant. As such, no case of quashing is made out, as there are parameters of quashing the FIR, which is not being fulfilled in the present case.

¶15

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands dismissed.

¶16

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶17

Amitesh/-

Satish Kumar Ravi v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Kumar Ravi v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bajrang Lal Choudhary And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ram Prasad Mahto And Ors. Vs State of Jhakrhand And Anr.

Bhim Chandra Dutta And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Bhagirath Das Vs the State of Jharkhand Represented through Director General of Police

Rambrij Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand