SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Pat) 628

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANSHUMAN, J.
Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late Jai Narayan Jaiswal – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 983 of 2022
Decided On : 10-04-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal.
For the Respondents: P.K. Shahi, Prabhu Narain Sharma.

Members of the Legislature are immune from proceedings in any court for anything said by them in the legislature, as per Article 194(2) of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

Sanction - Criminal Writ Petition - Sections 156(3), 166, 167, 420, 467, 468, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code - The court discussed the legal provisions related to the sanction for prosecution, fair investigation, and registration of First Information Report under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The court also highlighted the constitutional provision of Article 194(2) which provides immunity to members of the Legislature from proceedings in any court for anything said by them in the legislature.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a criminal writ petition seeking sanction for prosecution and fair investigation after the Chief Judicial Magistrate's order to refer the matter for investigation was not complied with. The court found that the petitioner repeatedly filed similar petitions for the same relief.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the petition devoid of merit and dismissed it with a cost of Rs. 25,000 payable to the Bihar State Legal Service Authority.

Issues: Non-compliance with Chief Judicial Magistrate's order, repeated filing of similar petitions, and the legality of seeking sanction for prosecution and fair investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petition lacked merit and was filed repeatedly for gaining cheap popularity. It also set aside the Chief Judicial Magistrate's order for lodging F.I.R. under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. due to its conflict with Article 194(2) of the Constitution of India.

Final Decision: The criminal writ application was dismissed with a cost of Rs. 25,000 upon the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

ANSHUMAN, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal, petitioner in person and learned Senior Advocate, Mr. P.K. Shahi, A.G. Bihar alongwith Mr. Prabhu Narain Sharma, for the State.

2. The present criminal writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

    “(a) For issuance of an appropriate writs, orders, directions including a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Office of the Hon’ble Governor of Bihar through Principal Secretary who is the competent authority to grant sanction for prosecution for his failure to decide the application submitted by the petitioner seeking sanction to prosecute, filed in compliance to the order dated 16.03.2021 passed in Cr. W.J.C. No. 453 of 2019; while petitioner’s inter-alia is dismissed.

(b) For issuance of an appropriate writs, orders, directions, including a writ in the nature of mandamus directing a fair investigation pursuant to the registration of First Information Report as directed by the Court of Learned owing to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna vide its order dated 31.10.2015, whereby the learned Magistrate owing to the facts, circumstances and nature of the offence alleged in the Complaint Case No. 3165 of 2015 transferred the said complaint for investigation to the concerned police station under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

(c) For issuance of an appropriate orders, directions to the Officer-In-Charge/Station House Officer of the Sachiwalaya Police Station, Patna for registration of First Information Report under Sections 166, 167, 420, 467, 468, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal code in compliance of the order 31.10.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 3165 of 2015.”

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that an order has been made in favour of the petitioner for lodging an F.I.R. vide order dated 31.10.2015 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 3165(C) of 2015, Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal vs. Nitish Kumar and Others in which the following order has been passed:

    “Heard and perused the complaint petition. The facts, circumstances and the nature of the offence mentioned in the complaint petition, the copy of the complaint petition is ordered to be send to the Sachiwalaya P.S. under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. through the S.S.P. Patna.

The complainant is directed to file six copies of the complaint petition within fourteen days, failing which, it will be assumed that the complainant is not interested to proceed with the case and the further proceeding of the case will be stopped automatically.”

4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 31.10.2015 was not complied, thereafter the petitioner has preferred Cr. W.J.C. before this Court bearing Cr. W.J.C. No. 916 of 2017 which was rejected by this Court, vide order dated 25.01.2018, thereafter the said order was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 1586 of 2018 which was dismissed on 05.03.2018.

5. Counsel has thereafter started filing different applications before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna on 05.01.2018, 10.04.2018, 04.05.2018, 15.05.2018, 10.07.2018, 25.07.2018 and 08.08.2018. On all the petitions, the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna have passed one order on 29.10.2018.

6. The petitioner, thereafter filed another writ petition before this Court bearing Cr. W.J.C. No. 454 of 2019 (Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal vs. State of Bihar through Secretary Home, Main Secretariat Patna and Others) with total six prayers which are as follows:

    “(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction, including a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the order dated 29.10.2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 3165(C)/2015 by which he has by a common order rejected the applications dated 5.1.2018, 10.4.2018, 4.5.2018, 15.5.2018, 10.7.2018, 25.7.2018 and 8.8.2018 filed by the petitioner.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction, in

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top