The High Court possesses inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings that are malicious or retaliatory, even when proceedings are ongoing.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.

Heard Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. V.S. Sahay, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 15.09.2015, by which, cognizance for the offence under Sections 385 , 504, 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE has been taken against the petitioners, in connection with C.P. Case No. 930 of 2015, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad.

3. The complaint case was lodged by the complainant alleging therein that on 29.03.2015 the complainant along with Kansari Mandal, Devi Sharan Sinha and Braj Kishore were in discussion of urgent matter of Bar Association at his house in Gobindpur. At about 12:00 PM all accused person namely, Radhe Shyam Goswami, Prayag Mahato, Harihar Prasad along with some hired persons came in a Maruti car bearing No. JH10N-7532 and forcibly entered into the premises and surrounded the chair persons and at the knock of deadly weapon the accused, Radhe Shyam Goswami and Prayag Mahato demanded Rs.5, 00,000/- only from them, putting under fear of death and said that this was the only way to get rid of the present attack on the present committee of the District Bar Association and to get the C.P. Case No. 42/2015 withdrawn from the court and also to save their tenure from re-election drive. They also demanded free allotment of chambers to them. On alarm people gathered there and then the accused persons left the place by giving threatening to come again.

4. Mr. Gadodia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the practicing advocates of Dhanbad Bar Association and they are also the active members of the said Bar. He submits that the petitioner No. 1 has filed a complaint against O.P. No. 2 (complainant), wherein the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are the witnesses of that case, being C.P. Case No. 42 of 2015 on 05.01.2015 for the alleged offences under Sections 420 , 406, 409, 114, 468, 477-A, 469, 120-B and 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . He further submits that in the said case, cognizance was taken by the learned court by order dated 16.06.2015. He further submits that the complaint case No. 42 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner No. 1, which has been supported by the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 as the witnesses in the said case. He further submits that the present case is the counter blast of the case filed by the petitioner No. 1. He further submits that only to harass and humiliate the petitioners, the present case has been filed. He further submits that so far as the complaint case No. 42 of 2015 is concerned, that has already been quashed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by judgment dated 06.02.2019 in Cr.M.P. No. 1311 of 2015. He also submits that the case was sent under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for registration without applying the judicial mind. He draws the attention of the court to Annexure-4 and submits that the report was called by the learned court from the police about any complaint made earlier pursuant to that page53 of the brief, the Officer-in-Charge of Govindpur Police Station informed that no such dispute was ever brought before him. He submits that the O.P. No. 2 has maliciously filed the case against the petitioners and the trial has also proceeded before the learned court. On these grounds, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed, as the case has been filed in retaliation of the previous one.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 submit