Arup Chatterjee vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

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 and set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the FIR as well as the order dated 21.03.2024 passed in connection with Nirsa P.S. Case No.158 of 2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 341, 427, 448, and 506/149 of the Indian PenalCode against the petitioner.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with co-accused person being member of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons on 11.05.2022 committed mischief by demolishing the culvert constructed in front of the shop of the informant by using a JCB machine and broke the slab put upon the same and the unlawful assembly vandalized the shop of the informant by breaking the articles in the shop and when the informant tried to restrain them from damaging his shop, the petitioner and the members of the unlawful assembly assaulted the informant, causing injuries to him and when on hearing hue and cry raised by the informant, others came to his rescue; the petitioner and the other members of the unlawful assembly also assaulted them and on being exhorted by the petitioner, the co-accused attempted to commit murder of the informant by throttling his neck and taking advantage of the number of persons in the unlawful assembly to be between 100-150 persons, they committed theft of Rs.3,000/- kept in the counter of the shop of the informant and committed criminal intimidation to the informant.

On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Nirsa P.S. Case No.158 of 2022 and took up investigation of the case, after completion of the investigation, police submitted charge sheet and on the basis of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the said offences.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge has not yet been framed and the case is next fixed to 06.02.2026 for appearance of the accused person of the case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner is an Ex-MLA and because of political rivalry, this false case has been foisted. It is then submitted that there is a delay of two days in sending the FIR to the Court, hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submit that the undisputed fact remains that if the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the materials which were collected during the investigation of the case are treated to be true then each of the offences in respect of which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance, is in fact made out and the contention of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false and because of political rivalry he has been framed in this case, is at the most a defence which he can take during the trial of the case. 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 petitioner and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused person, cannot be considered in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the High Court, as that would be 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 reiterated 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, 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 if the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the materials which were collected during the investigation of the case are treated to be true then each of the offences in respect of which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance is in fact made out and the only contention of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false and because of political rivalry, he has been framed in this case, is at best a defence which the petitioner can take during the trial of the case, but the same as well as the fact that there was a delay of couple of days in forwarding the FIR to the Court concerned cannot be a ground to quash the entire criminal proceeding at this nascent stage.

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