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

2022 Supreme(Jhk) 708

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Akhay Kumar Mohanty & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Opposite Parties
Cr. M.P. No. 1322 of 2020
Decided On : 21-02-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Indrajit Sinha.
For the Opposite Parties : Ms Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P., Mr. G.K. Sinha.

At the stage of challenging the FIR, the truth or falsity of the allegations would be decided at trial, and no interference was warranted.

Headnote:

FIR Quashing - Criminal Prosecution - Indian Penal Code - Sections 379, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 34 - The court discussed the allegations of misappropriation, submitting forged and fabricated bills, and the challenge to the FIR under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The court referred to the case of M/s Medchl Chemicals & Pharma P. Ltd. Versus M/s. Biological E. Ltd. & Ors. and emphasized that the truth or falsity of the allegations would be decided at trial, and at the stage of challenging the FIR, no interference was warranted.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution, including the FIR, in connection with a case alleging misappropriation and fraud in a road construction project. The accused persons were alleged to have misappropriated funds, materials, and documents, and submitted forged and fabricated bills to the complainant.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the investigation was ongoing and only the FIR was under challenge in the petition. It emphasized that the truth or falsity of the allegations would be decided at trial and no interference was warranted at the stage of challenging the FIR.

Issues: The issues revolved around the challenge to the FIR under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and the allegations of misappropriation, submitting forged and fabricated bills, and theft of documents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the truth or falsity of the allegations would be decided at trial and at the stage of challenging the FIR, no interference was warranted.

Final Decision: The petition for quashing the entire criminal prosecution, including the FIR, was dismissed at this stage.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Ms. Nehala Sharmin, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. G.K. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2.

2. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution including the First Information Report, in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 193 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 3046 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi.

4. The O.P. No. 2 filed the complaint alleging therein that the complainant is the business man, he run construction work in the name and style of M/s Anshul Construction. The accused persons are very clever persons. They are very known to the complainant and his family. They have also very well known about the work of the complainant and his firm. The complainant and his firm was allotted a work for road construction in Chakulia Bend Road from Mardabandh chowk to Kanimohli through Jugitopa, Jharia total distance of 5 kms. road. The complainant was constructing the aforesaid road peacefully and honestly. The accused persons known about the aforesaid work of the complainant and with the dishonest, malafide and fraudulent intention approached / induces to the complainant and witness no. 1 at their house in H.E.C. Qr. No. CD-68, Sector-2, Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District-Ranchi to do the work with them.

It is further alleged that for the above work the accused persons assured to the complainant and witness no. 1 that they will do their work with fully honesty and dignity and they also assured to invest their money in the aforesaid work. As per the assurance of the accused persons the complainant and witness no. 1 believed their versions and agree to do the work with them. For this the complainant entered into deed of partnership with accused No. 1 on dated 02.03.2015 at the house of complainant, wherein the accused No. 2 was also signed over the aforesaid deed of partnership as a witness. As per the above deed of partnership and assurance of the accused persons the complainant believed their version and started work with them. The complainant also believed the accused persons and hand over the entire work to them. The accused person started all the work like purchase material, transaction of money through cheque and cash operating the bank account etc. After some times the complainant came to know that both the accused persons have misappropriated the huge amount and materials from the aforesaid work and site. Thereafter the complaint along with the witness no. 1 inquire the matter and found that the huge materials have not been used in their site and the same was sold in another place. The accused persons are also given forged fabricated and false bills of materials to the complainant and taken huge amount from the for the same time to time. They have also not given the payment to the labours although the same has been obtained by the accused persons from the complainant. the complainant also came to know that accused persons have taken huge amount from him time to time by giving false statements for miscellaneous expenses.

It is further alleged that after the preliminary enquiry the complainant found that accused persons have misappropriate approx Rs.15,00,000/-(Fifteen lakhs), the amount may increase in further inquiry. They have also stolen valuable things like copy of DPR, Master roll, Register, Important documents, signed and unsigned cheques etc. from the office of the complainant. The complainant along with the witness no. 1 inquire the matter then they also found that the accused persons have dishonestly and fraudulently entered

    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