Advocates:
['R S MAZUMDAR', '', 'RISHAV DEV', 'MATINUDDIN KHAN', 'RAJESH KUMAR', 'SHEKHAR SINHA A P P', '', 'JAI SHANKAR TRIPATHI', 'MANJULA UPADHYAY']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. M.P. No. 367 of 2009

Sakal Deo Ram, son of Late Yugal Ram, resident of Birsa Nagar,

Holding No. 856, Zone No.1, P.S. Birsa Nagar, Town-

Jamshedpur, District- Singhbhum (East.)

…

…

Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Jitendra Dubey, S/o R.K. Dubey

R/o Basti no. 10, House no. 7, Padma Road, P.S. Singora,

Jamshedpur, Dist- East Singhbhum

…

… Opposite Parties

---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner

: Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate

Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Shekhar Sinha, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No.2

: None

---

14/18.06.2019

Heard Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate and Mr.

Pratik Sen, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2.

Heard Mr. Shekhar Sinha, counsel appearing on behalf of

the opposite party –State.

3.

Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

4.

This case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceeding

as well as the order dated 30.09.2008 passed in C/1 Case No.

1702 of 2008 whereby the learned court below has been pleased

to take cognizance of offence under Sections 295A, 323, 342, 341

and 379 of Indian Penal Code .

5.

Counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the First

Information Report which is dated 04.09.2008 , submits that the

entire case is a result of malicious prosecution against the

petitioner, who is a police officer and was acting in discharge

of his official duty which is apparent from annexure-3 to this

petition which shows that the petitioner had arrested the

informant of the present case in connection with Telco Birsa

Nagar P.S. Case No. 49 of 2008 on the same date i.e. 04.09.2008.

2

6.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that one case was

registered against the complainant of the present case which

was G.R. Case No. 403 of 2008 arising out of Telco (Birsanagar)

P.S. Case No. 49/08 in which the complainant was arrested and

a forwarding report dated 04.08.2008 was also prepared on

04.09.2008 as contained in Annexure- 4 of this petition. The

counsel also submits that at the time of his remand in judicial

custody in the said case on 04.09.2008 itself, a specific statement

was made by the complainant of the instant case before the

concerned court that he was not subjected to any ill-treatment

at the hand of the escort party. He submits that the complainant

of the present case is an advocate by profession and as a

counter-blast to his arrest on 04.09.2008, the complainant has

lodged the present case bearing Complaint Case No. 1702/08

and filed it on 05.09.2008 i.e on the very next date of his arrest,

making various allegations against the petitioner. The

counsel

submits

that

conduct

of

the

Opposite

Party No. 2 clearly indicates that the instant proceeding is a

result of malicious prosecution against the petitioner and is

accordingly an abuse of the process of court which is fit to be

quashed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7.

The counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

petitioner being a government servant, is entitled to protection

under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and as the

entire action of the petitioner in connection with arrest of the

opposite party No. 2 was in discharge of official duty, so, any

criminal prosecution arising out of the same requires a

sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

8.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the

aforesaid

facts

and

circumstances,

the

entire

criminal

proceeding is fit to be quashed. The counsel has also relied

upon the judgments reported in (2008) 5 SCC 248 (para 12 to

3

14); (2012) 12 SCC 72; (2016) 8 SCC 722