Back
2025 Supreme(Jhk) 66
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Abhay Kumar Mishra - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Jharkhand & Ors. - Respondent
CrMP No. 1990 of 2021 With W.P. (Cr.) No. 268 of 2021
Decided On : 28-02-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Krishna Prajapati , Adv., Mrs. Akritishree, Adv., Mr. Anshuman Mishra , Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Priya Shrestha, Spl. PP., Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG III., Mr. Binit Chandra, AC to AAG III : Mr. Mahesh Tewari
The court upheld the validity of an interim order, emphasizing it cannot be vacated without justifiable grounds, reinforcing the importance of procedural integrity in criminal proceedings.
Headnote:
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 482 - Interlocutory application to add parties and vacate interim order - The petitioner sought to add the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department as a party respondent and to vacate an interim order of no coercive action. The court noted that the interim order was a reasoned decision and should not be vacated without justifiable grounds. (Paras 2-5, 1-4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed an interlocutory application to add the Inspector General of Police, citing multiple false cases against him and requesting a quashing of the FIR. The application to vacate the interim order was based on claims of completed pleadings.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the application to vacate the interim order, affirming that the petitioner was not at fault for any delays in the proceedings.
Issues: The main issues included whether the interim order should be vacated and the validity of the grounds for doing so.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the interim order was a reasoned decision and could not be vacated without valid justification, emphasizing the need for thorough consideration of the facts and procedural integrity.
Result: Interlocutory application dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
I.A. No. 2512 of 2025 ( in CrMP No. 1990 of 2021)
Heard the parties.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer to add the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, as the opp. party no. 5, though it has been erroneously mentioned in the interlocutory application that the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, may be impleaded as party respondent no. 4. It is next submitted that this writ petition has been filed with a prayer for quashing the FIR on the ground that the FIR is misuse of provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is next submitted that the FIR has been filed by the informant, in person, in a representative capacity for his clients on the basis of the documents supplied by him which is an act of fomenting litigation. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that several false cases have been lodged against the present writ petitioner and another false case having been filed vide Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 191 of 2020. The writ petitioner also filed W.P. (Cr.) no. 278 of 2021 in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 191 of 2020 for completion of the investigation or for handing over the investigation to different investigating agency. It is next submitted that the officer-in- charge of Jagarnathpur Police Station, in the said W.P. (Cr.) no. 278 of 2021 has intimated that Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 191 of 2020 has been transferred to the Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi by the orders of the the Director General of Police, Jharkhand- cum Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand and the Director General of Police, Jharkhand has also directed in that order that supervision of all cases, will now be conducted by the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi. It is next submitted that vide memo no. 4256 dated 29.08.2024, three other cases, i.e. in total four cases, being Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 294 of 2017, Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 298 of 2017, Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 314 of 2017 and Jagarnathpur P.S. case no. 191 of 2020, have been transferred to Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi. It is next submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that vide order contained in memo no. 4256 dated 29.08.2024 issued under the seal and signature of the Director General of Police cum Inspector General, de-novo investigation has been directed to be conducted by the Crime Investigation Department, hence, the said Inspector General of Police of Crime Investigation Department is required to be impleaded as party opp. party no. 5 of this petition.
3. Mr. Mahesh Tewari, the opp. party no. 4, appearing in person, submits that he has no objection to the prayer of the petitioner.
4. Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer is allowed.
5. The registry is directed to incorporate the Inspector General of Police, Crime Investigation Department, Jharkhand, whose address has been mentioned in page 14 of the interlocutory application, as the party opp. party no. 5 in the cause title of the criminal miscellaneous petition.
6. This interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly.
I.A. No. 1212 of 2023 ( in CrMP No. 1990 of 2021)
1. The opp. party no. 4, appearing in person, has filed this interlocutory application and submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to vacate the interim order of stay of no coercive step, issued in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 15.09.2022, extended by the subsequent orders, time to time. It is next submitted by the opp. party no. 4, appearing in person, that the opp. party no. 4, in fact, meant and prays for vacating the interim order of no coercive step issued in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 15.09.2021 but inadvertently, the word “stay’ has been mentioned in the prayer portion in p
