Allowed

Md.Zeeshan And Ors. v. State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC10 Nov 2023Cr.M.P./785/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two connected criminal miscellaneous petitions, the High Court of Jharkhand quashed the impugned orders taking cognizance under Sections 323, 498A, and 379 IPC and related non-bailable warrants. The court held that prima facie materials were lacking and remanded the matters for fresh orders. Arguments on maliciousness were deemed suitable for trial.

What did the court decide?

Orders taking cognizance dated 05.05.2010 and 27.04.2010 in PCR/Complaint cases, along with subsequent non-bailable warrants, were quashed and set aside. Matters remitted for fresh orders.

Md.Zeeshan And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

Cr.M.P. No. 785 of 2010

¶4

1.Md. Zeeshan

¶5

Athar Hussain 3Shahena Khatoon @ Shahina Khatoon

¶6

Zeba Khatoon @ Zeba Shahin

¶7

Sufi Khatoon @ Sufi Shaheen

¶8

Md. Sarfaraz

¶9

.... …Petitioners

¶10

Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ..... …Opposite Parties

¶11

With

¶12

Cr.M.P. No. 784 of 2010 1.Azhar Hussain

¶13

Salma Khatoon

¶14

Akhtar Hussain @ S.A.N. Hussain

¶15

.... …Petitioners

¶16

Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ..... …Opposite Parties

¶17

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶18

¶19

For the Petitioners :- Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P.

¶20

16/ Dated:-10.11.2023

¶21

Cr.M.P. No. 785/2010

¶22

Notice upon O.P. No.2 has been effected. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has also appeared. Further notice upon O.P. No.2 has also been issued. Inspite of that nobody is present on behalf of O.P. No.2

¶23

In view of that this matter is being heard in absence of

¶24

the O.P. No.2.

¶25

Heard Mr. Soumitra Baroi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin learned counsel for the State.

¶26

Cr.M.P. No.785 of 2010 has been filed for quashing the order dated 05.05.2010 passed in PCR Case No. 37/2010 whereby cognizance has been taken under sections 323, 498A and 379 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara.

¶27

Further by order dated 18.01.2019, 21.12.2019 and

¶28

22.02.2020 non-bailable warrant of arrest, proclamations under

¶29

¶30

sections 82 and 83 respectively have been issued against the petitioners which was allowed to be challenged by order dated 08.12.2021. Thus the above orders are also under challenge.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1-Md. Zeeshan is not the husband of the O.P. No.2 and the case has been maliciously filed against the petitioners. He submits that earlier the case was filed by one Jeba Saheen under section 498A of I.P.C against Ibadat Hussain and on the instigation of Ibadat Hussain the present false case has been filed against the petitioners. He submits that the impugned orders are not in accordance with law.

¶32

Learned counsel for the State submits that the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is fit to be appreciated in the trial and not under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶33

The Court has perused the order dated 05.05.2010 whereby learned court has taken cognizance against the petitioners. What are the materials against the petitioners are not required to be disclosed in the order taking cognizance however what are the prima facie material against the petitioners is required to be taken against the petitioners which is lacking in the case in hand. Further orders dated 18.01.2019, 21.12.2019 and 22.02.2020 are not in accordance with law.

¶34

In view of above order taking cognizance dated 05.05.2010 including orders 18.01.2019, 21.12.2019 and 22.02.2020 passed in PCR Case No. 37/2010 are quashed and set aside.

¶35

The matter is remitted back to the concerned learned court to pass afresh order on the point of cognizance.

¶36

¶37

This petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. Interim order is vacated.

¶38

Cr.M.P. No. 784/2010

¶39

Notice upon O.P. No.2 has been effected. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has also appeared. Further notice upon O.P. No.2 has also been issued. Inspite of that nobody is present on behalf of O.P. No.2

¶40

In view of that this matter is being heard in absence of

¶41

the O.P. No.2.

¶42

Heard Mr. Soumitra Baroi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin learned counsel for the State.

¶43

Cr.M.P. No.784 of 2010 has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.04.2010 passed in T.R. No. 1032 of 2010 whereby cognizance has been taken under sections 498A/34 of the I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Giridih. 16. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the entire facts and even word which was the subject matter of Cr.M.P. no. 785 of 2010 are asserted in the present case. He submits that maliciously the case has been filed against the petitioners. He submits that the petitioner no.1-Azhar Hussain is not the husband of the O.P. No.2. He submits that onthe instigation of Ibadat Hussain the present false case has been filed against the petitioners. He submits that the order taking cognizance is not in accordance with law.

¶44

Learned counsel for the State submits that the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is fit to be appreciated in the trial and not under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶45

18 The Court has perused the order dated 27.04.2010 whereby

¶46

¶47

learned court has taken cognizance against the petitioners. What are the materials against the petitioners are not required to be disclosed in the order taking cognizance however what are the prima facie material against the petitioners is required to be taken against the petitioners which is lacking in the case in hand.

¶48

In view of above order taking cognizance dated 27.04.2010 passed in T.R. No. 1032 of 2010 Complaint Case No. 329 of 2010 is quashed and set aside.

¶49

The matter is remitted back to the concerned learned court to pass afresh order on the point of cognizance.

¶50

This petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. Interim order is vacated.

¶51

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶52

Satyarthi/-

Md.Zeeshan And Ors. v. State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md.Zeeshan And Ors. v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Venkateshwar Rao Alias N.V. Venketeshwar Rao Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Birendra Kumar Bhatia Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kamlesh Kanodia Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Mahesh Minz And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Yogender Singh And Ar Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jyotish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.