Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J
Anil Kumar Mishra Son Of Shri Madan Mohan Mishra – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
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 l
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 pr....
The court emphasized that the complaint did not need meticulous analysis before the trial to determine whether it would end in conviction or acquittal, and that the mala fides of the informant were o....
The court emphasized the distinction between civil and criminal disputes, ruling that a civil matter should not be criminalized without adequate evidence or specific allegations supporting the crimin....
The court quashed the FIR due to lack of prima facie evidence, ruling that the allegations did not constitute a cognizable offence and were maliciously instituted.
The court quashed the FIR under the SC/ST Act, finding no prima facie evidence of a cognizable offence, emphasizing the abuse of legal process.
The court emphasized the importance of evaluating the credibility of allegations and exercising inherent powers to prevent abuse of the legal process.
The court established that malicious prosecution can lead to quashing of proceedings under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and that the High Court has the authority to intervene in such cas....
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
