Amrit Prasad vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

Though, notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2, but no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in spite of repeated calls.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.2757 of 2022 including the order dated 06.02.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih whereby and where under the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has found sufficient material in the record to proceed against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 447, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegations against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons committed criminal trespass by entering into the property in possession of the complainant with intent to commit the offence and to intimidate the complainant who were in possession of the property, caused hurt to the complainant; by the male persons catching hold of the complainant, thereby causing wrongful restraint and the female persons assaulting her. There are also allegations against the petitioners of committing criminal intimidation by threatening to kill the complainant with intent to cause alarm to the her.

On the basis of the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the enquiry witnesses, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has passed the summoning order as already indicated above.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the allegations against the petitioners are false and the complainant is a habitual litigant and has instituted several complaints against the petitioners and interestingly two of the witnesses are the witnesses in 3 different complaint cases, hence, it submitted that the prayer as prayed for, in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that the undisputed facts remains that the allegations made in the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and statement of the enquiry witnesses are considered to be true in their entirety, then the offences in respect of which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has found sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners is in fact is made out, but the only contention of the petitioners is that the allegations against them are false. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law that the defence of the accused person of the case and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused person, cannot be considered by the High Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, as that would be the job of the trial court, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Ors. reported in (2004) 2 Supreme 501.

It is also a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594 that no mini trial can be conducted by the high court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C corresponding to Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, the relevant portion of which reads as under :-

"Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering. (Emphasis supplied)

Now coming to the facts of the case, the undisputed facts remains that the allegations made in the complaint, statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and statement of the enquiry witnesses, if are considered to be true in their entirety, then the offences in respect of which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has found sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners, is in fact made out, but the only contention of the petitioners is that the allegations against them are false is at best a defence, which the petitioners can take during the trial of the case, but certainly the same is not a ground to quash the entire criminal proceeding at this nascent stage when the prosecution of the case is yet to begin.

Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to accede to the prayer of the petitioners made in this Cr.M.P. in exercise of its power under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit is dismissed.