Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Sheo Kumar Bhagat @ Sheo Kumar Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) :
Learned counsel has not appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 in the first round of call and in second round of call of the present case, again nobody is present on behalf of opposite party no.2. In view of that, this petition is being heard in absence of opposite party no.2.
2. Heard Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. V.S. Sahay, learned counsel for the State.
3. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 27.08.2014 arising out of Complaint/Protest Case No.2044/2013, corresponding to T.R. No.348/2015, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih.
4. The complaint/protest case was filed alleging therein that on the date of occurrence the complainant was working in maintenance of vehicles. Accused no.1 came and entered into the shop and started abusing. On the protest of abusing, they assaulted by fists and slaps and asked them to vacate the shop premises otherwise kill you. Accused no.2 also came and entered into the shop and he also assaulted by way of fist and slaps. Both the accused threw some artic
Taking cognizance on similar allegations without new prima facie material constitutes an abuse of process of law.
Disclosure of prima facie materials and reasons for differing with the final form is essential for the court to take cognizance in a criminal proceeding.
The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons for differing with the final form and the need for careful scrutiny of evidence before summoning the accused in a criminal case.
Malicious filing of a complaint case and false denial of relationship can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings.
Inconsistencies in evidence, lack of reasons for differing with the final form, and the deceased's criminal antecedents led to the quashing of the order taking cognizance.
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.
A second complaint on identical facts is not maintainable unless exceptional circumstances exist, as established in prior case law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of evidence for the application of relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the court's authority to quash criminal proceedin....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
