Baldeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the order dated 30.10.2017 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma has found prima facie case against the petitioner for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and committed the case to the court of sessions but directed to issue summons to the petitioner.

¶16

The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner is an accused of Markachho P.S. Case No.48 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After registration of the F.I.R., police took up the investigation

¶17

¶18

Cr. M.P. No.370 of 2020

¶19

(2025:JHHC:15755)

¶20

of the case and submitted charge-sheet against the co-accused Jay Kumar Yadav on 23.10.2017, while continued the investigation against Tulit Mahto and Nirmala Devi. The same was placed before the learned Magistrate on 30.10.2017. Though police neither submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner nor continued the investigation of the case against him but basing upon the statement of the victim and other materials available in paragraphs-2, 3 and 5 of the case-diary, the learned Judicial Magistrate observed that prima facie case is made out against the petitioner also and committed the case to the court of sessions but simultaneously also issued summons to the petitioner. Subsequently, on 31.01.2018 police submitted Final Form against the petitioner and did not send him up for trial because of lack of evidence against him.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the learned Judicial Magistrate committed the case to the court of sessions; there is no way he could have issued summons to the petitioner, more so when the investigation of the case was going on and police did not submit charge-sheet against the petitioner; so it was premature on the part of the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma to observe that prima facie case is made out against the petitioner for the said offences also. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed.

¶22

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submits that since there was ample evidence in the record, to constitute the offences alleged, hence, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma has not committed any illegality in finding prima facie case of the said offences against

¶23

¶24

Cr. M.P. No.370 of 2020

¶25

(2025:JHHC:15755)

¶26

the petitioner, as well. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

¶27

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that since on 30.10.2017, the investigation of the case was going on; police did not submit the charge-sheet against the petitioner nor the police stated that there is sufficient material against the petitioner to constitute any offence. Certainly, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma has committed a gross illegality by observing that prima facie case is made out against the petitioner, as well. Further, as the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma has committed the case to the court of sessions, so there is no way he could have issued summons to the petitioner.

¶28

Accordingly, the order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Koderma in connection with Markachho P.S. Case No.48 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.876 of 2017 so far as it relates to the petitioner namely Baldeo Yadav is quashed and set aside; while maintaining the remaining portion of the said order.

¶29