Subh Karan Choradia Alias Subh Karan Choraria Alias Subh Karan Chaurasia Alias Subh Karan Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr.M.P No.36 of 2025

Subh Karan Choradia @ Subh Karan Choraria

@ Subh Karan Chaurasia, @Subh Karan aged about-45 years, son of late L.K. Choradia, P.O. & Village-Gogolao, P.S.-Nagaur, District-Nagaur, Rajasthan, presently working in HR Department, DVC Towers, HQ Kolkata P.O. Karkungachi, P.S. Maniktala, District-Kolkata and posted as Senior Manager (Electrical).

¶5

… Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

Arun Kumar @ Arun Tiwary, son of late S.K. Tiwary, R/o Puja Guest House, P.O. & P.S.-Maithon Dam, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶9

… Opposite Parties

¶10

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. R.N. Sahay, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soumitra Baroi, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, A.P.P.

¶12

Order No.03/Dated- 12.02.2025

¶13

1. Heard, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

¶14

2. Instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been preferred for quashing of the order dated 16.08.2024, whereby and where under, learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad had allowed the criminal revision No.116 of 2022 filed by the O.P. No.2 in which the O.P. No.2 had challenged the order dated 11.07.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dhanbad arising out of C.P. Case No. 2327 of 2020 in which learned Judicial Magistrate had dismissed the complaint petition filed by O.P. No.2 against the petitioner for alleged commission of offences under Sections 500 of the I.P.C.

¶15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.08.2024 passed by

¶16

Page | 1

¶17

learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Dhanbad in Criminal Revision No. 116 of 2022 whereby and where under the learned revisional court rejected the order of dismissal filed by the complainant. The case has been remanded to the concerned trial court for passing a fresh order. Learned counsel for the petitioner touches the merits of the case regarding necessity of sanction from the government for prosecution of public servant and the case also covers the exceptions provided under Section 499 of the I.P.C. Therefore, impugned judgment is not justified under law and fit to be set aside.

¶18

4. Learned A.P.P. opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and has submitted that learned Sessions Court in revision has only remitted back the case for passing of fresh order and no effective order prejudicial to the interest of the present petitioner has been passed as yet. Therefore, this petition is premature and fit to be dismissed.

¶19

5. I have gone through the record of the case and perused the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No.116 of 2022. It appears that it is the case registered against dismissal of the complaint petition filed by the complainant as the complaint was dismissed by the concerned trial court under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. That order was challenged in the revision by the complainant and the learned revisional court has only remitted back the case before the concerned trial court for reconsideration on certain points and to pass appropriate order a fresh in accordance with law. Obviously,

¶20

Page | 2

¶21

the present petitioner has not been summoned as yet for any of the offence and as such the impugned order is not prejudicial to his interest. Therefore, this petition stands dismissed at the initial stage itself.

¶22

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶23

Amar/-

¶24

Page | 3

Subh Karan Choradia Alias Subh Karan Choraria Alias Subh Karan Chaurasia Alias Subh Karan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subh Karan Choradia Alias Subh Karan Choraria Alias Subh Karan Chaurasia Alias Subh Karan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Gosain Vs State of Jharkhand

Chand Turi Vs State of Jharkhand

Lilawati Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanatan Mandi Alias Mardi Vs State of Jharkhand

Md.Lalu Mian Vs State of Jharkhand

Ms Indian Explosive Private Limited Through Its Signatory Namely Rakesh Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.