Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Mridula Sinha D/o Ram Swarath Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash the order dated 13.04.2023, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in Protest –cum-Complaint Case Number 1982 of 2018 whereby and where under the learned Magistrate has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 147/323/427 of the Indian Penal Code inter-alia against the petitioners.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were the members of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of the assembly they caused hurt to the complainant by beating her, indulging in rioting and caused mischief by damaging the property worth more than Rs.50/- of the complainant. On the basis of the Protest-cum-Complaint Petition filed by the complainant, statement of the complainant under solemn affirmation and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate found prima facie case inter-alia against the petitioners.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the peti
The court affirmed that a prima facie case can be established based on credible evidence and the legal requirement for the complainant to be heard, leading to the dismissal of the criminal petition.
The Magistrate cannot add or subtract charges at the cognizance stage in a case based on police reports; such amendments are only proper during the framing of charges.
The Magistrate has discretion under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to determine if a prima facie case exists for police investigation, requiring sufficient evidence from the complainant.
Under Section 482 CrPC, High Court cannot quash Section 304A IPC proceedings on police charge-sheet by assessing allegation falsity or conducting mini-trial; Magistrate need not record reasons for co....
The acceptance of a final report does not prevent a Magistrate from taking cognizance of a complaint based on a protest petition if supported by sufficient evidence.
The court affirmed that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.PC should be exercised sparingly, emphasizing the need for a trial when sufficient grounds for cognizance exist.
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
