Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 632 (JHR)

Amitabh Choudhary v. State of Jharkhand

2005-08-17

N.N.TIWARI

body2005
Order I.A. No. 1205 of 2005. In this application, the petitioners have sought for amendment in paragraph-1 and the relief portion of the petition by addition of the prayer for quashing the entire criminal prosecution arising out of the Complaint Case No. 1080 of 2002 filed by the complainant-opposite party no. 2. 2. It has been stated that the said prosecution against the petitioners and its entire proceeding is a sheer abuse of the process of the Court and that the same alongwith the order taking cognizance in this case are liable to be quashed by this court for the ends of justice. 3. Notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel has appeared on his behalf. The opposite party no. 2 has got no objection in allowing the said prayer for amendment. 4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed. The petitioners are permitted to amend the memo of petition in Criminal Misc. Petition No. 551 of 2005 in terms of the prayer made in this interlocutory application. This I.A. is accordingly disposed of. Cr. M.P. No. 551 of 2005 5. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 4.5.2005 and the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.1080 of 2002 now pending in the court of Sri S.K. Dubey, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur. 6. By the impugned order dated 4.5.2005 the court below has taken cognizance of the offences under Section 406 and 420 IPC against the petitioners on the basis of the allegation in the complaint petition supported by the solemn affirmation and the other materials on record. The allegation against the petitioners in the said complaint petition is that the accused persons/petitioners are the office bearers of the Jharkhand Cricket Association being the President, Secretary and Treasurer respectively. The complainant-opposite party no. 2 is a respectable person and very much interested in game. The complainant opposite party no. 2 came to know from the newspapers that the said Cricket Association was allotted the first one day cricket match between India and the West Indies to be played at Keenan Stadium, Jamshedpur on 6.11.2002 and the tickets will be issued for the said match. The complainant opposite party no. 2 came to know from the newspapers that the said Cricket Association was allotted the first one day cricket match between India and the West Indies to be played at Keenan Stadium, Jamshedpur on 6.11.2002 and the tickets will be issued for the said match. It was alleged that the accused persons/petitioners with common intention induced the general public to purchase tickets to watch the match in the said stadium and the complainant being highly interested in the match of cricket, purchased a ticket for gate No. 11, bearing ticket no. 018612 on payment of a sum of Rs. 400/- on 6.11.2002. On the day of the match the complainant went to the stadium with a view to watch the match. At that time there was no responsible person to guide him. The complainant any .how managed to locate the gate and found a long barricade and queue of ticket holders and also non-ticket holders, when the complainant went nearby the said Gate no. 11, he came to know that the gate was closed by the accused persons/petitioners and even the ticket holders were not allowed to enter into the stadium. When the complainant approached the Deputy Superintendent of Police and requested him to allow the ticket holders to enter into the stadium, the said officer directed the police men to disperse the ticket holders by applying force. In the said circumstance, the complainant had to return without watching the match. It was alleged that the accused persons/petitioners had intentionally cheated the common and general public including the complainant who had purchased the tickets for watching the said match out they were deprived of the same and thus the aforesaid petitioners have committed the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. The petitioners, aggrieved by the said order of cognizance have approached this Court for the reliefs first abovementioned. The points urged in support of the petition, inter alia, are that the petitioners are completely innocent and they have committed no criminal offence and, in fact, even on the basis of allegation no case constituting the said offences is made out against them. There is complete absence of criminal intent or mens rea. The points urged in support of the petition, inter alia, are that the petitioners are completely innocent and they have committed no criminal offence and, in fact, even on the basis of allegation no case constituting the said offences is made out against them. There is complete absence of criminal intent or mens rea. The petitioners are the office bearers of the Cricket Association under whom the match was organized but they are not supposed to man the gate of the stadium. Tickets of the match were sold subject to the conditions amongst other, that the playing hours would start from 9 A.M. and the ticket holders must occupy their seats at least one hour before commencement of the game. Thousands of ticket holders entered into the stadium by the scheduled time and watched the match. For those who, despite holding a ticket, could not enter in the stadium due to huge crowd, were requested by the advertisement to take refund of their money and a number of persons availed of the same and took refund. Due to huge crowd surrounding the stadium, a situation of law and order problem arose and police had to resort to lathi charge and for which the petitioners cannot be blamed. 8. It has been further contended that though the petitioners were not at fault, they have been falsely implicated in the case. The complaint petition was filed deliberately after lapse of 14 days of the alleged incident which shows the mala fide of the petitioners. The case is wholly vexatious, frivolous, malicious and fictitious and the same is the abuse of the process of the Court. The order taking cognizance is wholly illegal, mechanical and vitiated and the entire proceeding is liable to be set aside by this Court. 9. Mr. Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant-opposite party no. 2 on the other hand submitted that complaint was lodged as the complainant-opposite party no. 2 was denied entry into the stadium despite holding a valid ticket which caused him agony. However, as stated in the counter affidavit, the opposite party no. 2 subsequently realized and both the parties arrived at mutual settlement and now the complainant does not want to proceed with the case. 10. 2 was denied entry into the stadium despite holding a valid ticket which caused him agony. However, as stated in the counter affidavit, the opposite party no. 2 subsequently realized and both the parties arrived at mutual settlement and now the complainant does not want to proceed with the case. 10. Having considered the contentions of the parties and after examining the record and hearing the learned counsel, I find that the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute the alleged offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and without any cogent and sufficient material on record, learned court below has mechanically taken cognizance of the said offences and has erroneously issued summons to the petitioners. However, since the matter is now not being contested and the complainant-opposite party no. 2, has now no grievance and he does not want to proceed with the case, no elaborate discussion is required to reach at the conclusion. Suffice is to say that there is absence of mens rea and element of criminal intent on the part of the petitioners and they cannot be held liable for any criminal proceeding. On the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1080 of 2002 pending in the court below, including the order taking cognizance dated 4.5.2005 of the alleged offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners, are hereby quashed. This application is allowed. However, without any order as to costs.