Allowed

Prem Kumar @ Prem Kumar Yadav and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC18 Apr 2013CR. MISC./33502/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna HC allowed a petition to quash an order sending petitioners for summons on merits of an alleged IPC 341/323 case. The Court held the prosecution was malicious, filed by a person with a chequered history of false cases, and threatened to harass school employees, relying on Bhajan Lal principles.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 3.3.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint-cum-Protest pet. 1876 C/2010 is quashed.

Prem Kumar @ Prem Kumar Yadav and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar… — Quashing and FIR | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33502 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶4

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33502 of 2011

¶5

======================================================

¶6

Prem Kumar @ Prem Kumar Yadav S/O Sri Kameshwar Prasad

¶7

Mohan Kumar S/O Late Bhagat

¶8

Ravindra Singh S/O Sri Sardar Charan Singh

¶9

Vishwanth Singh S/O Sri Ram Janam Singh

¶10

All resident of C/O Sri Guru Gobind Singh Girls High School, Bare Ki Gali, Patnacity, P.S. Chowk, District - Patna 5. Kaushal Kishore S/O Sri Suresh Chandra Singh R/O C/O Sri Guru Gobind Singh Boys High School, Bare Ki Gali, Patnacity, P.S. Chowk, District - Patna

¶11

Tejinder Pal Singh @ Tejinderpal Singh Dhillon S/O Late Bakshi Singh R/O 'Dhillon Niwas, Chamjoria More, Patnacity, P.S. - Chowk, District - Patna 7. Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar Tamauli S/O Late Deo Narayan Prasad R/O East Malahi Pakri, P.S. Patrakar Nagar, District - Patna

¶12

.... .... Petitioners Versus

¶13

The State Of Bihar

¶14

Dr. Surjit Singh, Advocate S/O Late Harnam Singh R/O Mohalla - Abbulas Lane, Machhuatoli, Police Station - Kadamkuan, District And Town - Patna

¶15

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶16

====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioners : Mr. Murari Pd. Sinha, Advocate For the State: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P. For opposite party 2 : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶17

3 18-04-2013 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in spite of valid service of notice and in my view, this petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶18

Petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 3.3.2011 passed by Sri Akshay Kumar Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint-cum- Protest petition no. 1876 C /2010 by which and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate, having conducted enquiry under

¶19

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33502 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2013

¶20

¶21

section 202 of the Cr.P.C, found prima facie case under sections 341 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and ordered to issue summons against the petitioners.

¶22

On 8.1.2010, opposite party no.2 gave a written report to Officer-in-charge of Sachivalaya police station stating therein that on the same day at about 12.25 p.m. when he reached near the gate of the office of the State Information Commission, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 along with five other persons attacked on him and snatched his file as well as cash.

¶23

On the basis of written report, Sachivalaya P.S. Case no. 11/2010 under sections 341, 379, 506 and 323 of the IPC was registered and after completion of investigation, police submitted final form showing accusation untrue but opposite party no.2 filed protest petition against investigation of the aforesaid case. The learned court below accepted the final form but proceeded on protest petition treating it as complaint case and in course of enquiry, recorded the statement of enquiry witnesses. The learned court below, having considered the materials, passed the impugned order in the manner as stated above.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the above stated case is a glaring example of malicious prosecution. He submitted that wife of opposite party no.2 got appointment in Sri Guru Gobind Singh Girls High School, Patnacity on the basis of fake certificate and when the aforesaid fact was detected, the Managing committee of the aforesaid school lodged criminal case against wife of opposite party no.2. He further submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 are employees of the aforesaid Sri Guru Gobind Singh Girls High School, Patnacity and so far as the petitioner no.7 is concerned, he is employee of health department. He further contended that the

¶25

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33502 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2013

¶26

¶27

petitioner no.6 (since dead) was the secretary of the Managing committee of the aforesaid school. It is further contended by him that opposite party no.2 has chequered history of filing of false cases against innocent persons and up till now, he has filed more than 35 cases against innocent persons with an intent to harass or blackmail them. It is further contended by him that almost all the cases filed by opposite party no.2 against innocent persons including the petitioners have been found false and police several times prayed for initiation of proceeding under sections 182 and 211 of the IPC against opposite party no.2 . He further submitted that learned court below passed the impugned order in mechanical way. So even if it is found that in course of enquiry, witnesses supported the story of opposite party no.2, then also, the above stated circumstance clearly suggests that the instant case is nothing but a malicious prosecution and squarely coved under the decision given by Apex Court of this country in Bhajan Lal case.

¶28

On the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, supported the impugned order.

¶29

Annexure 11 to this petition reveals that Dy.S.P. Town, Patna reported to IG Patna vide his letter no. 2736 dated 31.5.2008 that opposite party no.2 filed several cases against several persons but almost all the cases were found false. Similarly, Annexures 6, 7 and 8 to this petition also suggest that several complaint cases were filed against other persons and the aforesaid complaint cases were dismissed by the court in course of inquiry. Furthermore, annexure 5 to this petition reveals that committee of Tahakt Sri Harmandirji Patna Saheb lodged Chowk P.S. case no. 66/2001 for the offences punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 476, 120B of the IPC against wife of opposite party no.2 on the allegation that she got her

¶30

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33502 of 2011 (3) dt.18-04-2013

¶31

¶32

appointment in Sri Guru Gobind Singh Girls High School, Patnacity on the basis of forged and fabricated certificate.

¶33

Admittedly, the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 are employees of the aforesaid school and the petitioner no.6, since dead, was member of Managing committee of the aforesaid school. Therefore, I find force in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that the present prosecution of the petitioners is nothing but only a malicious prosecution.

¶34

No doubt, a complaint petition should not be thrown at the very threshold and the allegation levelled against the accused should be enquired in course of trial but if prima facie it is found that any case has been filed with mala fide intention with an intent to harass or humiliate the accused, said case should be thrown at the very threshold and the continuance of the aforesaid case would be nothing but only an abuse of the process of the court.

¶35

On the basis of the aforesaid discussions, I feel no hesitation to quash the impugned order and accordingly, this quashing petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 3.3.2011 passed by Sri Akshay Kumar Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint-cum- Protest petition no. 1876 C /2010 is, hereby, quashed.

¶36

In the aforesaid manner, this petition stands disposed of at the

¶37

admission stage itself.

¶38

Shahid/-

¶39

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

Prem Kumar @ Prem Kumar Yadav and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar @ Prem Kumar Yadav and Ors. v. the State of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Sonu @ Aftab Vs The State Of Bihar

Ram Bilas Sadai Vs The State Of Bihar

Moin Raza Vs State of Bihar

Shivdani Sharma and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar

Dhanesh Kumar and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.