The court established that repetitive complaints lacking substantial evidence against the accused can constitute malicious prosecution, warranting quashing of proceedings to prevent abuse of legal processes.

JUDGMENT :

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.02.2016 alongwith the entire criminal proceedings of the case so far the petitioner is concerned. The impugned order has been passed by the learned court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 2102 of 2015 whereby cognizance of the offence under Section 354(B) of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner and others.

Arguments on behalf of the Petitioner

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the entire criminal proceedings has submitted that the records of the case will reveal that the case arises out of malicious prosecution. He has submitted that there are repeated cases filed one after another relating to the same incident and the present case has been filed by Dharmshila Devi, wife of Surendra Kumar Rai. The earlier case being Complaint Case No. 111 of 2015 was filed by Surendra Kumar Rai, husband of Dharmshila Devi in which 23 persons were made opposite parties and apart from that, it was also mentioned in the Complaint that there were 100 to 150 unknown accused persons. The learned counsel submits that the Complaint Case No. 111 of 2015 was sent to the concerned police station for investigation by the police and was numbered as Sadar P.S. Case No.91/2015 dated 19.09.2015 (G.R. No. 538 of 2015) and has been ultimately quashed by this Court in exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. He has further submitted that upon investigation, Final Form was submitted by the police in the said case, but the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa vide order dated 09.12.2016 had differed with the Final Form and had taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 452, 454, 354(B), 387, 406, 420, 467, 468, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code . The criminal case was ultimately quashed by this Hon’ble Court in Cr.M.P. No. 241 of 2017 on 05.04.2022.

4. Upon perusal of the said order passed in Cr.M.P. No. 241 of 2017, it is apparent that there were altogether 17 petitioners, but the present petitioner was not a party. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after the order was passed in Cr.M.P. 241 of 2017 dated 05.04.2022, the criminal case has already been dropped.

5. The learned counsel further submits that the present Complainant-Dharmshila Devi had filed another complaint case which was Complaint Case No. 426 of 2017 and the entire criminal proceeding of the said Complaint Case including summoning order dated 18.02.2022 has also been quashed by this Court vide order dated 05.09.2023 passed in Cr.M.P. No.2119 of 2022. However, the petitioner is not a party in Cr.M.P. No.2119 of 2022.

6. The learned counsel submits that in the meantime, Complaint Case No. 2102 of 2015 was filed by the Opposite Party No. 2 against the petitioner and other accused persons.

7. The learned counsel submits that arising out of the same incident with slightly different version, different cases have been filed. The other two cases have already been quashed by this Court and the present case has been filed with a malafide intent and it is a clear case of malicious prosecution for almost similar set of allegations with little bit of difference. The Opposite Party No. 2 has been filing cases either herself or through her husband.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that essentially the dispute is in connection with one school and the Opposite Party No. 2 is acting in a malicious manner and filing criminal cases giving criminal colour to the dispute. The learned counsel has referred to the three cases and claimed that they arise out of the same incident. The learned counsel has relied upon the following judgments: -

(i) (1988) 1 SCC 692 Paragraph 7

(ii) (2002) 3 SCC 89 paragraphs 6 and 8

(iii) 2022 SCC Online Del 245 Paragraphs 13, 14 & 15

(iv) (2020) 13 SCC 435 paragraphs 10 to 16

(v) 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1582 paragraph 23

(vi) 202