Back
2020 Supreme(Jhk) 63
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.
Harish Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Vigilance - Opposite Party
Cr. M.P. No. 2490, 1181, 1557, 1797, 1182, 1562, 2489 of 2016, 1711, 1459 of 2018, 3591, 3644, 3730, 3756, 84 of 2017, W.P.(Cr.) No. 221, 190, 191 of 2016
Decided On : 17-03-2020
For the Petitioners:Mr. A. K. Kashyap, Senior Advocate With Mr. Antriksha Shrivastava, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate, Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate, Mr. Kumar Basant Narayan, Advocate, Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. P. S. Dayal, Advocate, Mr. Purnendu Sharan, Advocate
For Anti Corruption Bureau, Jharkhand :Mr. T. N. Verma, Advocate , Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Arpit Kumar, A.C. to G.A.-II
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 154 read with Section 300 - Constitution of India - Article 20(2) - Second FIR - There can be different trials for same offence if tried under two different enactments altogether and comprised of two different offences under different acts\statutes without violation of provision of Article 20 (2) or Section 300 Cr.P.C. - When several offences are alleged to have been committed by several accused persons normal rule is separate trial - When parties are different, issue of estopped does not arise - Constitution bars double punishment for same offence, but conviction for such offence does not bar for subsequent trial and conviction for another offence and it does not matter even if some ingredients of two offences are common. (Para 32)
JUDGMENT :
Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.
1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. A. K. Kashyap, Senior Advocate submits that there are three sets of cases i.e.
a. Following cases relate to Vigilance P.S. Case No. 30/2016 corresponding to Vigilance Case No. 32/2016:
i. Cr.M.P. No. 2490 of 2016
ii. Cr. M.P. No. 1181 of 2016
iii. Cr.M.P. No. 1459 of 2018
iv. Cr. M.P. No. 1557 of 2016
v. Cr.M.P. No. 1797 of 2016
vi. W.P.(Cr) No. 191 of 2016
b. Following cases relate to Vigilance P.S. Case No. 31/2016 corresponding to Vigilance Case No. 33/2016:
i. Cr. M.P. No. 1182 of 2016
ii. Cr.M.P. No. 1562 of 2016
iii. Cr.M.P. No. 2489 of 2016
iv. Cr.M.P. No. 1711 of 2018
v. W.P.(Cr) No. 190 of 2016
And
c. Following cases relate to Vigilance P.S. Case No. 32/2016 corresponding to Vigilance Case No. 34/2016:
i. Cr.M.P. No. 3591 of 2017
ii. Cr.M.P. No. 3644 of 2017
iii. Cr.M.P. No. 3730 of 2017
iv. Cr.M.P. No. 3756 of 2017
v. Cr.M.P. No. 84 of 2017
vi. W.P.(Cr) No. 221 of 2016
3. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that all Cr.M.P. have been filed by the accused persons under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the 2nd FIR and similar questions are involved therefore they have been tagged together forming a batch of cases. Learned counsel also submits that so far as writ petitions being W.P. (Cr.) No. 190 of 2016, W.P. (Cr.) No. 191 of 2016 and W.P. (Cr.) No. 221 of 2016 are concerned, they have been filed by the opposite party Anti Corruption Bureau and they are also relating to the concerned cases which are involved in the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions (Cr.M.P.) and therefore, they have also been tagged along with the criminal miscellaneous petitions to be taken up together. He submits that the writ petitions were filed for amalgamation of the cases for which Dhanbad/Dhansar P.S. case as well as Vigilance P.S. case were filed.
RELIEFS PRAYED IN THE CASES
4. The reliefs as prayed for in Cr.M.P. No. 2490 of 2016 , Cr. M.P. No. 1181 of 2016 , Cr.M.P. No. 1459 of 2018, Cr. M.P. No. 1557 of 2016 and Cr.M.P. No. 1797 of 2016 are for quashing the F.I.R. bearing Vigilance P.S. Case No. 30/2016 including entire criminal prosecution in connection with corresponding Vigilance Case No. 32/2016 registered under Sections 406,409,419,420,423,424,467,468,471,474,477A,120B/109/34 of I.P.C., Section 3(1)(v) and 4 of the S.C & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 13(2) read along with Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
5. W.P.(Cr.) No. 191 of 2016 has been filed by Anti Corruption Bureau for the following reliefs:
(a) For issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 27.05.2016 passed by the learned Court of J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad in Dhanbad (Dhansar) P.S. Case No. 398/2015 corresponding to G.R. No. 1793/2015, whereby and where under the prayer of the petitioner for amalgamating the above said case with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 30/2016 corresponding to Spl. (Vig.) Case No. 32/2016 has been rejected. Case is now said to be pending in the court of J.M. Ist Class, Dhanbad.
(b) For issuance of an appropriate order for closing the prosecution arising out of Dhanbad (Dhansar) P.S. Case No. 398/2015 corresponding to G.R. No. 1793/2015 and every other corresponding prosecution arising out of the said FIR since the respondent no. 1 has been pleased to transfer the case to the A.C.B. Jharkhand vide notification dated 02.03.2016 (Annexure-2) to conduct specialized investigation keeping in view the magnitude of high degree of corruption and conspiracy between public servants and the other accused persons in the matter of defrauding and depriving original raiyats who belong to the weakest section of the society in receiving compensation for losing their land for construction of ring road and as such the A.C.B. Jharkhand has lodged FIR vide Vigilance P.S. Case No. 30/2016 corresponding to Spl. (Vig.) Case No. 32/2016.
6. The reliefs as prayed for in Cr. M.P. No. 1182 of 2016 , Cr.M
