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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 725

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
Masum Khan @ Masoom Khan @ Sabih Ahmed, Son of Late Wazir Ahmed Khan - Petitioner 
Versus 
The State of Bihar and Anr. – Opp. Parties
Criminal Miscellaneous No.5086 of 2023
Decided On : 07-04-2025 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ali. M. Ahmad, Adv., Mr. A. Akhtar, Adv., Mr. Shahbaj Alam, Adv., Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ansul, Sr. Adv., Mr. Karandeep, Adv.

The court emphasized that a discharge is warranted when the allegations do not establish a prima facie case, particularly in the absence of strong suspicion and material evidence linking the accused to the crime.

Headnote:(A) CrPC - Section 239 - Discharge petition - Rejection of discharge petition by Judicial Magistrate questioned - Allegations of extortion and threats against the petitioner - Ex-vice president of political party alleged false implications due to political rivalry - Judicial scrutiny necessary before framing charges - Impugned order quashed on grounds of 'grave suspicion' not being provided by Magistrate - Petitioner found not present at crime scene, thus allegations deemed groundless. (Paras 10, 20, 30, 36, 39)

(B) Judicial Discretion - The necessity for courts to apply strict scrutiny when determining groundlessness of charges to prevent unwarranted harassment of innocent individuals. (Paras 9, 22, 37)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a civil engineer and political figure, was accused in a case involving extortion and threats made against an informant, a political rival. The allegations stemmed from a politically motivated rivalry, alongside unfounded claims about the petitioner’s involvement in a crime, leading to the dismissal of the charge.

Findings of Court:
Court found no material evidence linking the petitioner to the charges, thus his discharge was necessary to prevent further false accusations.

Issues: The court addressed the presence of strong suspicion required to frame charges and the implications of political rivalry on accusations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of strong suspicion or material linking the petitioner to the alleged charges mandated the quashing of the impugned order.

Result: Petition allowed; impugned order set aside.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments regarding absence of strong suspicion against the petitioner. (Para 6 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 21)
3. court's analysis of the prosecution case and applicable law. (Para 7 , 9 , 15 , 17 , 19 , 23 , 25 , 27 , 28)
4. ratio decidendi on the need for careful consideration of grounds for charge. (Para 35)
5. final ruling and quashing of the lower court's order. (Para 38 , 39 , 40)

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.

Heard Mr. Amit Srivastava, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Ansul, learned senior counsel for the informant/opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Zainul Abedin, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present petition is being preferred for quashing/setting aside the impugned order dated 16.12.2022 as passed by Ms. Pooja Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate - 1st Class, Motihari, East Champaran in Trial No. 1031/2022 arising out of Turkauliya Banjariya P.S. Case No. 193 of 2021, whereby and whereunder application for discharge of the petitioner as pressed by petitioner/accused under section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the ‘Cr.P.C.’) has been rejected.

3. The prosecution story in brief is that Dr. Kumkum Sinha (informant-Opposite Party No. 2) Ex- Nagar Parshad Ward No. 18 Motihari cum District President (Mahila) JDU, East Champaran, had given her written information on 06.03.2021 before the Officer-in-charge of Banjariya Police Station stating inter alia that she is a practicing lady doctor having her own clinic near NH-28 Singhia Sagar Morh, P.S Banjariya. On 05.03.2021 at 7:45 PM, while she was returning to her residence at Badhai Tola from her nursing home Shivam Seva Sadan, Singhia Sagar Morh, on the way, four unknown persons on two motorcycles having no number plate surrounded her car, out of which one was white colour Appache motorcycle and another was black Red colour Pulsar motorcycle, and after stopping her car on way made a demand of Rs. 50,00,000/- as extortion and, said that it is the Farman (mandate) of one Masoom Bhai (petitioner), and if the demand was not fulfilled within five days, then her clinic would be exploded and her children would be kidnapped from their way to school. The informant alleged that she was also threatened that if she would inform to police then she will face dire consequences. The informant/O.P. No. 2 stated that after this incident she became pretty sure that this Masoom Khan is the same person who had attacked earlier upon her and is also accused in another case for beating and demanding extortion money from junior engineer of PWD department and for the said incident, he was also sent to jail. It is further alleged that not only this, even in case No. 1/2018 which is registered at Sadar Police Station, arrested accused Lal Saheb has confessed that Masoom Khan is hatching criminal conspiracy with the help of other criminals and they may likely to kill complainant, her husband and childrens, and were also likely to explode her clinic with bombs but, in the meantime, all of them got arrested with arms. It is further alleged that Complainant/informant had also filed a complaint in this regard. Aforesaid incident was also published in the newspaper. The informant /O.P. No. 2 has also alleged that in the month of October 2017 accused has also demanded ransom from her staff over telephone from jail and a threat was also advanced to her clinic staff through whatsapp. It is alleged that Masoom Khan is mentally torturing her by abusing, making calls from his mobile and through internet call. It is further alleged that threat was also given to retrieve her photos from social networking site as to make it viral after tampering it. It is further alleged that the accused always chased/followed her vehicle. The informant/O.P. No. 2 stated that the petitioner always used to say that his brother is working as a Peshkar/clerk with Judge, therefore, he’ll easily come out from jail, in any c

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