Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 218 (JHR)

Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. State of Jharkhand

2023-02-21

GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

body2023
JUDGMENT : Instant petition has been filed for quashing of summoning order dated 04.07.2022 whereby and whereunder, prima facie case has been found to be made out under Sections 379, 341, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners in Complaint Case No.1444 of 2019. 2. Complainant and the petitioners are Railway employees, residents of adjacent quarters in Dhanbad. The case of the complainant, in brief, is that on 19.03.2007, in the morning at 7.30, the petitioners assaulted and abused the complainant and his wife. A proceeding under Section 107 of Cr.P.C was initiated when the complainant reported the matter to the police. It is further alleged that accused Poonam Gupta snatched chain from the neck of the complainant’s wife and accused Rajesh Kumar Gupta pushed her on the floor and tried to kill their child. 3. Statement of the complainant was recorded on S.A. and three witnesses were examined during enquiry. The learned Court below found a prima facie case to be made out and passed the impugned order against which the instant petition has been preferred. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners that the present case is a malicious prosecution and abuse of process of Court. The petitioner No.1 had lodged FIR bearing Dhanbad P.S Case No.233 of 2018 under Sections 341, 323, 325, 506 of the IPC against the complainant. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken. The present case is only a counter case to pressurize the petitioners from withdrawing the earlier case. Further a proceeding under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C. has also been initiated in which the notices has been issued. 5. At the outset, it must be noted that possible defences of the accused need not be taken into consideration at the time of issuing of process. There may be a situation wherein, the defence of the accused is unassailable which can demolish the case of the complainant. Such defences cannot be ignored at the stage of issuance of process. However, at this stage the Court cannot undertake a mini trial to scrutinize the probative value of the materials brought on record during enquiry. 6. This Court cannot enter into disputed questions of fact at this stage. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed.