Ritesh Kumar Das vs State Of Jharkhand on 22 December, 2025

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Ritesh Kumar Das vs State Of Jharkhand on 22 December, 2025

1. This criminal appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the order dated 11.06.2024 passed by Sri Sujit Kumar Singh, the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Dhanbad in SC/ST Case No.22 of 2024 by which the complaint 1 2025:JHHC:38698 has been dismissed under Section 203 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 on the ground that ingredients of offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (POA), 1989 are not satisfied.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the Respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order dated 11.06.2024 passed by the learned Court below is illegal and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the learned Court below has dismissed the SC/ST Case No.22 of 2024 filed by the appellant, although the complainant during her solemn affirmation and Enquiry witnesses examined as EW-1, EW-2, EW-3 and EW-4 have fully supported the case of the complainant for abusing the complainant in the name of his caste in public view. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Anr. reported in 2020 (10) SCC 710. It is further submitted that the order passed by the learned Court below has resulted into miscarriage of justice and the said order may be set aside and this criminal appeal may be allowed.

4. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that no illegality has been committed by the learned Trial Court. It is submitted that a detail reasons has been assigned by the learned Court below for rejecting the case. It is submitted that the complainant and the witnesses are claiming as identified workers and company has stopped to provide the facility. It is submitted that the learned Court below has also observed the dispute between the Management and the Company is pending and this Complaint has been filed only to enter into the company and hence this criminal appeal may be dismissed.

2025:JHHC:38698

5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from perusal of the records of this case, it appears that the learned Court below while passing the order had discussed about filing two writ petitions WP(C) No. 402/2024 and WP(C) No.511/2024 by the appellant before the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand against the Management of CIMFR including the concerned Officer of CSIR.

6. It also appears that the complaint has been filed only to put pressure upon the Respondents to absorb the complainant into the services and this amounts to wreck vengeance.

7. It would be appropriate to quote the operative portion of the impugned order passed by the learned Spl. Judge, Dhanbad which reads as follows:-

"Complainant has filed the case under Special SC/ST Act against the officials of CIMFR to put pressure on them. The facility has been stopped since the year 2020. Complainant and other workers have not been given any appointment letter being a permanent worker. Writ petition are pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi. The workers had been made payment through contractor as per statement of witness. The workers have been given instruction to come through outsourcing company. The matter is pending before the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Dhanbad and since the year 2006. Complainant and witnesses are claiming as identified worker and company had stopped the facility. The local people is not produced on behalf of the complainant. The complainant ought to have alleged that he was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the accused with intent to humiliate in a place within public view. The basis ingredients of the offence are missing in this case, then permitting such a complaint to continue and to compel the accused to face the rigmarole of the criminal trial would be totally unjustified leading to abuse of process of law. This is a case where stringent provisions of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (PoA) Act, 1989 has been invoked to settle dispute with the management. After filing writ petitions and raising the matter before Central 3 2025:JHHC:38698 Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour court, Dhanbad by complainant's party, the present case has been filed to wreck vengeance. It is at best it is a matter of dispute between worker and Management which has been tuned to a revenge by taking recourse of the protective SC/ST Act.

Upon going through the facts and materials available on the case record as well as the attending circumstances of this case, the case is Prima-facie not made out against accused Alok Sharma, Kumar Rahul, Ranu Kumar, Rakesh Kumar & Sunil Kumar Burnwal as there are no sufficient ground available on the record to proceed against them. The complaint case is dismissed u/s 203 of Cr.P.C. Let the case record be consigned to DRR as per rules."

8. This Court finds no illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Court below.

9. Thus, the impugned order dated 11.06.2024 passed by Sri Sujit Kumar Sinha, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Dhanbad in SC/ST Case No.22 of 2024 is hereby affirmed.

10. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.649 of 2024 is, hereby, dismissed.

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated 22.12.2025 Nishant/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court