MD Sarfaraz Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No. 846 of 2023

----

Md. Sarfaraz, aged about 46 years, son of Md. Taimur Ali Kadri, resident of Village Burdhiakhad, P.O. – Giridih, P.S. – Giridih, District - Giridih .... Petitioner

¶4

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶5

2. Arvind Deo, son of Late Tapeshwar Deo, having his address at Jayaswal Neco Industries Ltd. Branch office at Cemetery Road, near St. Columba’s college, P.O. and P.S. – Hazaribagh, District - Hazaribagh .... Respondents

¶6

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶8

--For the Petitioner :- Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate :- Mr. Ritesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate :- Mr. K. Hari, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Awanish Shekhar, AC to AAG-I For respondent No.2 :- Mr. R.K. Tiwari, Respondent ----

¶9

07 /21.08.2024 I.A. No.10315 of 2023 has been filed for ignoring the

¶10

defect No.9(iii).

¶11

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the impugned order dated 11.08.2023, the name of the petitioner and other side has not been mentioned and in view of that the said defect may kindly be ignored.

¶12

3. It transpires that in the certified copy of the impugned order which has been annexed as Annexure-6, the name of the petitioner

¶13

and other side has not been mentioned and in view of that, the defect No.9(iii) is ignored for the time being.

¶14

--1--

¶15

W.P. (Cr.) No. 846 of 2023

¶16

4. I.A. No.10315 of 2023 is allowed and disposed of.

¶17

5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

¶18

6. The prayer in the writ petition is made for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Giridih Town P.S. Case No.220/13 corresponding to G.R. No.2402/2013 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

¶19

7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegations are made that the petitioner being the power of attorney holder has sold the land to the company. He submits that the sale deed has already executed in favour of the respondent No.2 and the role of the petitioner has over. He further submits that now the complainant has also compromised the matter with the petitioner and joint compromise petition, I.A. No.4970 of 2024 has been filed. He submits that the dispute is civil in nature and the compromise is made in view of that the respondent No.2 is not willing to pursue the matter, so far the present petitioner is concerned.

¶20

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent State submits that the FIR has already registered, however, in the joint compromise petition, it transpires that the compromise is there.

¶21

9. Mr. R.K. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the compromise has reached between

¶22

--2--

¶23

W.P. (Cr.) No. 846 of 2023

¶24

the petitioner and the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 does not want to proceed against the petitioner.

¶25

10. In view of the above, it transpires that the petitioner being the power of attorney holder of the land in question and the execution is already made, as such the role of the petitioner is over and the respondent No.2 has compromised the matter that has been stated in the I.A. meant for joint compromise petition. The said I.A. supported by the separate affidavit of the petitioner and of respondent No.2. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Giridih Town P.S. Case No.220/13 corresponding to G.R. No.2402/2013 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, so far the petitioner is concerned, is hereby quashed.

¶26

11. The writ petition as well as I.A. are disposed of

¶27

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶28

Sangam/

¶29

--3--

¶30

W.P. (Cr.) No. 846 of 2023

MD Sarfaraz v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Sarfaraz v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhurjateshwar Choubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Tiwari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramswarup Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Birendra Toppo Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramashish Roy Alias Ramashsih Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Visun Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner