Jharkhand High Court
Binay Kumar Singh And Another vs The State Of Jharkhand And Another on 12 September, 2023
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
W.P.(Cr.) No. 395 of 2023
----
Binay Kumar Singh And Another .... Petitioners
-- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand and Another .... Respondents
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Shubham Gautam, Advocate
----
6/12.09.2023 Heard Mr. Sah, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Gautam, the learned counsel for the respondent State.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Dhanbad P.S.Case No.1183 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.5083 of 2013 including the order taking cognizance dated 16.09.2016 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate cum Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Dhanbad.
3. The FIR has been registered alleging therein that the informant had purchased a flat in Shankaran Kailash Apartment through registered sale deed dated 29.3.2006 for which the informant had also taken bank loan. It has been further alleged that all the named accused persons in criminal conspiracy through forged power of attorney had sold flat in favour of the accused no.5. It has also been alleged that the accused persons in conspiracy had forcefully occupied possession of the land appertaining to Khata No.136, Plot No.92, Mouja No.7. On the basis of the aforesaid typed copy of the written report, a first information report being Dhanbad P.S.Case No.1183 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.5083 of 2013 was registered under sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420 and 120B of the I.P.C against the petitioners and others.
4. Mr. Sah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation is only against the son namely Shiv Kumar Bhardwaj and there is no allegation against these petitioners who 2 happened to be father and mother of said Bhardwaj. On this ground he submits that no case is made out, however, the learned court has taken cognizance.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent State submits that the learned court has looked into the charge sheet and the other materials and has taken cognizance and there is no illegality in the order taking cognizance.
6. In view of the above submission of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the Court has looked into the contents of the FIR and it appears that the allegation is not only against Shiv Kumar Bhardwaj but the allegation is there against Binay Kumar Singh and Amita Singh who are the petitioners in the present case and the allegation is made out of preparing of false power of attorney and selling out the property which was kept by another person however the said property was already mortgaged with the Bank. Thus, prima facie case is there against the petitioners. The police has investigated the matter and submitted the charge sheet and looking into the materials the reasoned order has been passed by the learned court whereby he has been pleased to take cognizance. In the charge sheet when the prima facie case is there the learned court is only required to record the prima facie materials and he can take cognizance by the impugned order and the learned court by way of speaking order has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioners. No case of interference is made out.
7. Accordingly, W.P.(Cr.) No.395 of 2023 is dismissed.
8. Pending petition if any also stands dismissed accordingly.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/,