The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles of abuse of process of law and mala fide intentions in filing a complaint, as outlined in State Haryana Versus Bhajan Lal and Hitesh Verma Versus State of Uttarakhand & Another.

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 the case is that complainant had filed Complaint Case No.766 of 2015 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro on 25.07.2015 on which by order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sector-4 ST and SC P.S. Case No.10 of 2014 was registered against the accused persons including this petitioner under Sections 341, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, but being introduced by the accused persons the I.O. of the case did not record the statement of the witnesses and had wrongly submitted the final report in the case. Further, it has been submitted that the complainant belonged to Khata No.59, Plot No.3590, 3591, 3592, and Khata No.302, Plot No.3589, 5384 and 3593 total area of 7.60 acres which is adjacent to the land of Khata No.317, Plot No.3589, 3571 area 23 acres. On that land tribal Sarna Pooja place, grazing field, playing ground and funeral place near Joria river are situated and the land is used by general public. The accused persons intending to grab the land were erecting boundary wall on the land used by public. On 22.07.2012, they were digging the foundation and when the complainant along with some witnesses went there and prevented them, the accused persons become furious started abusing him in his caste and name Manjhi, untouchable and also threatened him. They also threatened to eliminate them if they interfere in their matter. The accused persons also attached upon the complainant and villagers and assaulted them by fisting and by clubs and sticks. Accused Suresh Thakur also took away Rs.2500/- from the pocket of complainant and accused Shibu Mahatha snatched golden chain from his neck. Accused Vijay Yadav assaulted him by stick. Protest petition by the complainant was treated as complaint and the statement of the complainant was recorded on oath. In his statement on oath, the complainant has stated that the accused Suresh Thakur along with his companions Shibu Mahatha, Karim Ansari, Mirtunjay Tiwary, Pandu @ Pant Pandey went on Khata No.307, Plot No.3589, 5371 and started erecting the boundary, when the informant along with Sadhin Tudu, Govind Bouri and others went and opposed them, they abused him insulting him in his caste name and threatened to murder him. In course of scuffle, they also took out Rs.2500/- cash and a chain from his neck. The complainant has stated that accused persons have also lodged a case against them regarding the same occurrence.

Cr.M.P. No.3755 of 2017

6. The similar fact in this Cr.M.P. are also stated as of Cr.M.P. No.554 of 2020.

7. Mr. Majumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in Cr.M.P. No.3755 of 2017 submits that protest cum complaint petition has been filed being aggrieved with the police repo