P.V. KOTHAIYA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed for quashing of the F.I.R. arising out of C.K.P. P.S. Case No. 13/2001 dated 15.02.2001 registered under Sections 354/498/376/511/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the entire criminal prosecution launched against the petitioner -P.V. Kothaiya. The facts in brief is that the informant namely Baby Mahato was appointed as a cleaner on compassionate ground in Railway. She was asked by the Foreman to appear in the office of this petitioner at Chakradharpur and a memo was handed over. When the informant with memo went to the office of petitioner situated at Chakradharpur, she was kept confined in the Chamber and she was molested and her modesty was outraged. This incident took place on 30.1.2001 but considering prestige and dignity, initially the informant kept mum but on 15.02.2001 she lodged a written information with the officer -in -charge, Parsudih Police Station, Jamshedpur and said written/report was forwarded to concerned Police Station i.e. Chakradharpur where it was registered vide C.K.P. P.S. Case No. 13/2001. The petitioner has also filed I.A. No. 270/2013 with a prayer to quash the order dated 21.5.2008 by which cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 498/376/511/353/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner.

(2.) IT is contended that the informant has launched a malicious prosecution against the petitioner because desire of transfer expressed by the informant was not attended by the authorities. It is contended that the informant was always creating pressure for getting transfer from Tata Nagar to Kharagpur and for which so many representations had been filed. Since the request of the informant/opposite party was not conceded, she has adopted different method and lodged this case with false allegation against the petitioner and one P.K. Banerjee. It is further pointed out that prior to institution of this case, she was suspended and it was communicated to her.

(3.) LEARNED J.C. to S.C. -II further pointed out that prayer for anticipatory bail has also been rejected by this Court.