IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Arun Kumar Dubey, son of late Anirudha Dubey – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr.M.P. No. 2578, 2249 of 2016
Decided on : 25-04-2022
Sexual Harassment - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Cr.P.C. - [FACT OF THE CASE] The petitioners, who were employees of B.C.C.L, were accused of sexual harassment by the complainant, who had filed multiple complaints against them. The petitioners sought to quash the criminal proceedings against them, citing exoneration in earlier internal committee reports and alleging malafide intent on the part of the complainant. [FINDING OF THE COURT] The court found that the petitioners had been exonerated in two separate internal committee reports and concluded that the criminal proceedings were instituted with malafide intent. [ISSUES] The issues revolved around the allegations of sexual harassment, the petitioners' exoneration in internal committee reports, and the malafide intent of the complainant. [RATIO DECIDENDI] The court applied the principles laid down in 'Ashoo Surendranath Tewari v. CBI' and 'State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal' to determine that the criminal proceedings were manifestly attended with malafide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive. [FINAL DECISION] The court quashed the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P.Case No.1338 of 2014, including the order dated 10.9.2014, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad. Cr.M.P.No.2578 of 2016 and Cr.M.P.No.2249 of 2016 were allowed and disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Lukesh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of O.P.No.2.
2. In both the cases common complaint are under challenge wherein allegations are made against the petitioners.
3. These petitions have been filed for quashing the judgment dated 09.09.2016 passed in Cr.Revision No.281 of 2014 in Cr.M.P. No. 2578 of 2016 and Cr.Revision No.234 of 2014 in Cr.M.P. No. 2249 of 2016 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Dhanbad whereby the criminal revision application preferred by the petitioners challenging the order taking cognizance dated 10.09.2014 has been dismissed and also for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P.Case No.1338 of 2014, including the order dated 10.9.2014, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad.
4. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioner in Cr.M.P.No.2249 of 2016 was H.O.D (Legal), B.C.C.L and petitioner in Cr.M.P.No. 2578 of 2016 was Manager (Personnel and Administration), B.C.C.L and in both the petitions the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 09.09.2016 passed in Cr. Revision No.281 of 2014 and Cr.Revision No.234 of 2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-V, Dhanbad whereby he has dismissed the criminal revision application and affirmed the order dated 10.09.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad whereby he has taken cognizance against the petitioners.
5. O.P.no.2 has filed the complaint case before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad alleging therein that:
ii) Upon getting aware of such activities of accused no.1, accused nos. 2 and 3 used to cause financial and physical assault on the complainant. Accused nos.2 and 3 have also threatened the compliant that if she does not listen to their sayings, she would be transferred to such place where people will rip and tear her to the extent that she would not be in a position to do service. Accused no.2 (petitioner herein) always comes to the complainant and hurts dirty words and exerts pressure for making her succumb to his sayings and he has even asked for money on many occasions. Two years age, he had taken a sum of Rs.30,000/- and presently again making a demand of Rs.50,000/-. For not paying the amount, he is getting her insulted through Devashish Chatterjee who is a clerk in the same office and accused no4. In C.P.Case No.1338 of 2014. Accused no.3 also in connivance with accused no.2 is provoking her to do wrong things.
iii) Due to such acts of the accused persons the complainant has become mentally harassed and feels injured. In this regard, the complainant has been informing through written application to the high ranked officials, but except assurance no relief has been extended. Accused no.1 has now started saying that he has become a high officer in the BCCL and no one can do anything to him. You are a tribal lady and still there is time you do in the manner I say, otherwise along with you the services of your husband would also be terminated and your life would be made to hell.
iv) Accused no.3 says that the complainant and her husband both are working in BCCL, either you surrender yourself to us or to give money and out of fear the com
Ashoo Surendranath Tewari v. CBI
Manoj Kumar Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh
Vineet Kumar And Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
The court has the power to quash criminal proceedings if they are manifestly attended with malafide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, as established in 'Ashoo Surendranath Tewari v.....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of CrPC 482 and the significance of previous judgments and departmental proceedings in determining the quashing of a criminal proce....
The burden of proof in a criminal proceeding is different from that in a departmental proceeding. The court must treat complainants of sexual harassment and assault sensitively and ensure a fair tria....
The court established that malicious prosecution can lead to quashing of proceedings under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and that the High Court has the authority to intervene in such cas....
Point of Law : Powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see ....
High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings in exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to accused, would save preci....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and that the court should prevent the abuse of....
High Court under Section 482 CrPC cannot quash proceedings where specific allegations of cruelty, dowry demands, assaults and harassment prima facie constitute offences; no evidence appreciation at t....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.