Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1030 (JHR)

Rajeev Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2017-07-05

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, learned APP appearing for the State. 2. In this application the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 513 of 2014 (G.R. No. 4862 of 2014) including the order dated 31.10.2014 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, cognizance of the offence punishable u/s 341, 323, 504 and 34 I.P.C. has been taken, now pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi. 3. It has been stated by learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that on account of the Lawyers of the High Court abstaining from work a scuffle is alleged to have taken place, leading to F.I.R. by the President of Lawyers' Association, who is now no more. Learned senior counsel further submits that a compromise was also effected and filed before the learned court below but the same was not moved on account of death of the informant. It has also been submitted that on a frivolous issue, the petitioners who all are the eminent lawyers of this Court have been implicated in a criminal case and their image are being tarnished on account of pendency of the criminal case against them. Learned senior counsel therefore submits that the entire criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed and set aside. 4. Since the informant Sri Ram Kishore Prasad who was the President of Lawyers' Association is now no more and the State being the prosecuting Agency, Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State is heard in detail. 5. The allegation made in the written report submitted by the informant is that he along with his client was going to do Pairvi in connection with a case being W.P.(P.I.L.) No. 3366 of 2014 and had entered in Court No. 1, when the accused persons started using force against him and got him fallen down to the earth and his file was also snatched and he was opposed and threatened with dire consequences. It has also been alleged that at the instigation of accused persons large number of the advocates entered inside the Court room and threw him out from the Court room and his client was also slapped by one of accused. It has also been alleged that at the instigation of accused persons large number of the advocates entered inside the Court room and threw him out from the Court room and his client was also slapped by one of accused. It has also been stated that the occurrence was seen by the Bench Clerk and Steno. 6. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted u/s 341, 323, 504 and 34 I.P.C. against the accused persons pursuant to which cognizance was taken for the offences punishable u/s 341, 323, 504 and 34 I.P.C. vide order dated 31.10.2014. 7. The petitioners in the present case are all eminent lawyers practicing in the High Court of Jharkhand. The allegations made in the F.I.R. seems to be a factional fall out between the association of the informant as well as the association to which the petitioners belong. The matter had subsequently been compromised prior to the death of the informant and a joint comprise petition was also filed on behalf of both the sides as could be reflected in the order order dated 31.03.2015 of the learned court below in which one of the persons arrayed as an accused had been granted bail. The dispute as it seems is between the Advocates who are practicing before this Court and since good sense has prevailed, the matter was compromised between the parties. However, on account of unfortunate demise of the informant who was the President of Lawyers' Association, the joint compromise petition could not be moved. It further appears that the offence as alleged against the petitioners are compoundable. If the veil is lifted from the allegations made in the F.I.R. it would transpire that the same has been made only on account of dispute between the rival factions and after good sense has prevailed, compromise has been effected between the parties and therefore it would be an abuse of the process of the Court to continue with the criminal proceeding more so in view of the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioners. 8. 8. I find force in the argument of the advanced by learned senior counsel for the petitioners and having discussed the issue in details, as indicated herein above, this application is allowed and the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 513 of 2014 (G.R. No. 4862 of 2014) including the order dated 31.10.2014 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, cognizance of the offence punishable u/s 341, 323, 504 and 34 I.P.C. has been taken, pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, is hereby quashed and set aside.