Petition under Section 482 CrPC challenged rejection of his discharge petition; he claimed he had rented out the house where gutka manufacturing was seized. The court held only prosecution materials are considered at charge-framing and dismissed the petition.
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. 1815 of 2023
Md. Afzal, aged about 49 years, son of late Hazi Abdul Rauf, resident of 113B Block, Dhatkidih, near Central Maidan, P.O. & P.S.- Bistupur, Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum
…... Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party For the Petitioner : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Addl. PP
P R E S E N T
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
1
Cr.M.P. No. 1815 of 2023
The police upon investigation of the case found the allegation against the petitioner to be true and submitted charge sheet; consequent upon which, vide order dated 16.06.2021, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 188, 269, 270 of IPC and under Sections 24/26 of COTPA, 2003. When the matter was pending for consideration of charge, the petitioner filed a discharge petition, on the ground that since he let out his house on rent to Irba Khan, hence, the petitioner be discharged. Further, Irba Khan to whom the petitioner claims to let the house on rent, died much prior to the date of occurrence on 30.07.2020. Learned trial court considered that the landlord cannot absolve himself of the liability for the rented premises utilized for any illegal activity. The defence of the petitioner can be considered at the time of the trial and rejected the discharge petitioner. In the order dated 09.05.2023, in Cr. Rev. no. 45 of 2023, learned Sessions Judge, considered the settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Orissa vs. Debendra Nath Padhi reported in (2005) 1 SCC 568 to the effect that the materials produced by the prosecution only is to be considered at the time of framing of charge and not the one produced by the accused and in para 18 of the said judgment, the settled principle of law was reiterated to the effect that at the stage of framing of charge, the defence of the accused cannot be put forth and further it was observed that permitting the accused to adduce his defence at the stage of framing of charge, is against the criminal jurisprudence and considering the allegation against the petitioners observed that the learned CJM, has properly considered the materials placed before it, and there is no illegality and dismissed the revision application.
2
Cr.M.P. No. 1815 of 2023
anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in ABA No. 267 of 2021, hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.
3
Cr.M.P. No. 1815 of 2023
occurrence and the petitioner has not whispered a word as to who was in possession of the house in question, after the death of the person, to whom the house was rented, the petitioner do not dispute that he is the owner of the house.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 1st July, 2024 Smita /AFR
4
Cr.M.P. No. 1815 of 2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether defence materials (claim of having let out the premises on rent) can be considered at the stage of framing of charge in a discharge petition.
Whether the CJM's rejection of the discharge petition and the Sessions Judge's dismissal of revision suffered from illegality.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Orissa vs. Debendra Nath PadhiRelied on
(2005) 1 SCC 568 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Md. Afzal
The State of Jharkhand
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
