Jharkhand High Court
Puja Pandey vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors on 29 November, 2016
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (Cr.) No. 235 of 2016
---
Puja Pandey W/o Sri Banarsi Pandey,
Resident of Raj Apartment, Block A, 5-B,
P.O. & P.S. Bariyatu, District-Ranchi ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Director General of Police, Ranchi, at Police Headquarter
P.O+ P.S. District-Ranchi
3.Officer In-charge, Bariyatu, P.O. & P.S Bariyatu, District-Ranchi.
4.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ranchi,
at P.O.+ P.S. Kotwali, District-Ranchi.
5.Sri Sanjiv Kumar Jha, Resident of 5-C,
Ram Apartment, Block-A, Bariyatu,
P.O. & P.S. Bariyatu, District-Ranchi.
6.Sri Mithilesh Prasad Singh,
Assistant Sub Inspector, Bariyatu Police Station,
P.O. & P.S. Bariyatu, District-Ranchi ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.C. Tripathi, Senior Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, J.C. to S.C. V
---
05/29.11.2016Heard Mr. P.C. Tripathi, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, learned J.C. to S.C. V. In this application the petitioner has sought for a direction upon the respondents to properly investigate into the P.S. Case No. 227 of 2016 corresponding to G. R. No. 3584 of 2016 instituted against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 376/511/323/341/354/504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that improper and perfunctory investigation has been made by the Investigation Officer. Although, the case was instituted under Section 376/511/323/341/354/504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code after much persuasion, but neither any medical report of the petitioner is on record nor the petitioner has been examined in course of the investigation. It has further been submitted that without disclosing the real facts a vague statement has been made that based on a secret information, the police has come to know about the incident of throwing garbage which is just false and malicious against the petitioner. Learned Senior counsel further submits that since the investigation has been -2- improperly conducted, appropriate direction be given to the respondents to conduct further investigation into the matter by examining the petitioner medically as well as orally.
Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha , learned J.C. to S.C. V on the other hand submits that after investigation it was found that the dispute is with respect to throwing the garbage which resulted in hot talks between the petitioner and the informant - Archana Kumari @ Dolly Jha and Sanjiv Kumar Jha - respondent no. 5 . It has been submitted that having been found the case under Sections 376/511 to be false, charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It appears from the counter affidavit that the investigation has been conducted by the police leading to submission of final form under Sections 504/34 of I.P.C., as no case under Sections 376/511/323/341/354 of the Indian Penal Code was found to be true against the respondent no. 5 as well as Archana Kumari @ Dolly Jha. It further appears that a counter case has already been instituted by Archana Kumari @ Dolly Jha vide Bariayatu P.S. Case No.228 of 2016 on the allegation of throwing of garbage and exchange of hot talks.
Since the allegations have not been found to be true so far as Sections 376, 511, 323, 341 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code against Archana Kumari @ Dolly Jha and the respondent no. 5, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or upon the investigation, which has been conducted by the Police, this application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move the appropriate forum against the submission of final form with respect to the offence which has not found to be true in course of investigation.
Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) R. Shekhar /RG Cp 3