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

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 1091

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Shibu Mahatha @ Shiv Shanker Mahtha, son of Late Prafulya Mahtha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Mr. Srikant Swaroop.
For the Opp. Parties : Mr. P.K. Appu, Ms. Priya Shrestha, Mr. Sanjay Kumar.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points:- The petitioners sought to quash orders summoning them for trials under the SC/ST Act and IPC based on alleged mala fide and counterblast to prior cases. (!) (!) - The court applied principles from Bhajan Lal and Hitesh Verma to determine abuse of process of law and mala fide intentions in filing the complaint. (!) (!) - The court categorized the filing as falling under Category-7 of Bhajan Lal’s framework, indicating abuse of process of law due to mala fide motives. (!) - The complaint/during protest petition appeared to be a counterblast after police reports and prior cases, suggesting mala fide motive. (!) (!) - Final decision: quashing of criminal proceedings against certain petitioners on grounds of abuse of process and mala fide intent. (!)

What is the criteria to exercise abuse of process of law and mala fide intentions in filing a complaint under the SC/ST Act and IPC?


JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Prasad and Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. Srikant Swaroop and Mr. P.K. Appu and Ms. Priya Shrestha, learned A.P.P. for the State as well as Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

2. These criminal miscellaneous petitions have 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. In both the petitions common order taking cognizance are under challenge that is why both the petitions have been heard together with consent of parties.

4. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 13.09.2017 passed in connection with Protest Petition cum C.P. Case No.766 of 2015 passed by ADJ 1st cum Special Judge, Bokaro. Petitioners have been summoned to face the trial for the offence under Sections 3(i), (r), (s) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Sections 323, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

Cr.M.P. No.554 of 2020

5. The fact of t

      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 telegram-icon
      whatsapp-icon Back to top