IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr.M.P No. 42 of 2016

-------

Sanjay Kumar Singh, Son of Surendra Nath Singh, resident –E-

33, 4^th Floor, Krishna Apartment, Boring Road, Patna, Bihar. P.O

& P.S-Boring Road

… Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Matukdhari Das, Son of Pandav Das, resident of Village-

Kolbendi, P.O.+P.S.- Pindrajora, District-Bokaro, Jharkhand.

…Opposite Parties

-------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

-------

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P

-------

06/10.01.2019

Mr. Tapas Roy, the learned A.P.P appears for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks quashing of the entire criminal

proceeding arising out of Pindrajora P.S Case No. 31 of 2015

corresponding to G.R No. 423 of 2015 which has been registered

for offences punishable under Section 420, 406 and 120B IPC.

3.

Stand taken by the petitioner is that in discharge of his

duty as Chairman of Hello Group of Company he has done only

what is required of a Chairman and therefore he is not liable to

be prosecuted in a criminal case for the offences under

Section 420, 406 IPC read with Section 120B IPC.

4.

On the allegation that the complainant was approached

on 06.09.2004 by the co-accused Mithilesh Kumar Das and

Tirath Kumar Das projecting themselves agents of Hello Chemical

Company Limited of which the petitioner is the Chairman, he

was induced to purchase 1000 share bonds of the company, the

complainant has filed Complaint Case No. 388 of 2014. There

are serious allegations made in the complaint petition against all

the accused persons. The plea taken by the petitioner that being

the Chairman of the Hello Group of Company he cannot be

prosecuted for offence under Section 420, 406 IPC read with

Section 120B IPC is wholly misconceived. At this stage, a First

2

Information Report/Complaint can be quashed only when it can

be demonstrated that a bare reading of the complaint discloses

that the allegations pertain to purely civil dispute or that there is

no allegation against the accused at all. Both these aspects are

absent in the present case.

5.

Finding no merit in this quash-petition, Cr.M.P No. 42 of

2016 is dismissed.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

Amit/