Jharkhand High Court
Mahesh Bareja & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr. on 26 June, 2015
Author: Prashant Kumar
Bench: Prashant Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 824 of 2002
1. Sri Mahesh Bareja son of Late B.L. Bareja, resident of Qr. No.
a/98, Sail Township, Doranda, Ranchi
2.Sri Kalim Ansari son of Sri latif Ansari, resident of Qr. No. c/18,
Sail Township, Doranda, Ranchi
3.Sri Krishna Gurung son of Sri Juthe Gurung, resident of Qr. No.
H/41, Shyamali, Doranda, Ranchi ... ....Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Triloki Nath Mukherjee son of Sri B.K. Mukherjee, resident of
Qr. No. H/93, Shyamli Colony, Doranda, Ranchi
....Opposite Parties
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR
For the Petitioners: Mr. Delip Jerath
Mrs. Jasvindar Kaur Mazumdar
Mr. Rajesh Kumar
For the State: Mr. Shekhar Sinha, APP
For the O.P. No. 2: Mr. Mahesh Tewari
9/26.06.2015: This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 05.08.2002 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with C-816 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi took cognizance of the offences under sections 384/385 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and issued summons.
It is alleged that on the date of the occurrence the complainant was called in the chamber of the petitioner no. 1 and was directed to write something on a blank paper. When complainant refused, all the petitioners threatened him with dire consequences and on the aforesaid threat, complainant wrote on the blank paper as dictated by the lawyer of the school.
It appears that after the said incident, complainant has lodged FIR vide Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 50 of 1999 under section 385 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Police after investigation, submitted final form. Thereafter the present protest petition filed which was treated as complaint. The learned court below made an inquiry under section 202 of the Cr.P.C. and after the inquiry, passed the impugned order.
It appears that during the pendency of this case, complainant appeared in this case and filed counter affidavit. In the said counter affidavit, complainant categorically stated at paragraph no. 5 that he does not want to pursue the criminal case pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ranchi vide C-816 of 2001. He further submitted that he wants to withdraw the prosecution against the accused-petitioners. Sri Mahesh Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 had also stated so at the time of hearing.
-2-From perusal of the allegations made in the protest petition as well as the statements of complainant on S.A. and depositions of witnesses, I find that the dispute between the parties are private in nature and no public policy involved in it. It further appears from the counter affidavit that the parties have settled their dispute and complainant does not want to pursue the criminal case filed against the petitioners in the court below.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceeding against the petitioner.
Thus, I allow this application and quash the order dated 05.08.2002 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with C-816 of 2001.
( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-