JAY PRAKASH ROY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND : DINESH PASWAN
LAWS(JHAR)-2009-7-50
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on July 24,2009

Jay Prakash Roy Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Jharkhand : Dinesh Paswan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) IN this application petitioner prayed for quashing the order dated 6.4.2005 passed by CJM, Giridih in Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 130 of 2003 corresponding to T.R. No. 1398 of 2005 whereby and whereunder he took cognizance of the offence under section 447, 505, 353 of the IPC and also under section 3 /4 of SC and ST ( Prevention of Attrocities) Act against the petitioner and two other accused. The petitioner further prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of the aforesaid Giridih (T) P.S. Case No. 130 of 2003 corresponding to T.R. No. 1398 of 2005.
(2.) IT appears that O.P. No. 2 lodged a written report in Sadar Police Station, Giridih, alleging therein that the accused persons including the petitioner had come to his office on 13.6.2003 at 10 a.m. It is then alleged that they threatened, abused and torn government files and papers and asked the informant to register his tracker without payment of entry tax otherwise face consequences. It is further alleged that the accused persons including the petitioner had told that he is Dusadh, a schedule caste and he will be shown his status, as the accused persons were keeping the schedule caste on their foot. It is further stated that at the time of occurrence other employees of the office and other public present in the office. It appears that on the basis of aforesaid written report, Giridih(T) P.S, Case No. 130 of 2003 dated 20.6.2003 was instituted and police took up investigation. It then appear that after completing the investigation charge sheet submitted against accused persons including the petitioner. On the basis of said charge sheet learned CJM, Giridih vide order dated 6.4.2005 took cognizance of the offence and transferred the case in the file of SDJM, Giridih for commitment etc.
(3.) IT is submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that coaccused Sambhu Rai has filed the complaint case against the informant and District Transport Officer in the court of CJM on 16.6.2003. It is submitted that since petitioner appeared in that case as an advocate, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that no offence under The SC and ST (Prevention of Attrocities) Act (hereinafter referred as Act of 1989) made out as the petitioner is not knowing the caste of informant. It is further submitted that on the same day another FIR was lodged by the District Transport Officer which was registered as Giridih (T.) P.S. Case No. 129 of 2003 and in the said written report the District Transport Officer has not mentioned anything that the informant of this case has also been abused and/or threatened by the accused persons including this petitioner. It is further submitted that this petitioner filed criminal miscellaneous petition no. 929 of 2005 against the order taking cognizance in connection with Giridih(T) P.S. Case No. 129 of 2003 and the same was allowed by a bench of this court vide order dated 10.10.2007 and the proceeding against the petitioner has been quashed. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.