High Court Jharkhand High Court

Ashok Kumar Tiwary vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 8 November, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Ashok Kumar Tiwary vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 8 November, 2011
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  Cr.M.P. No. 159 of 2008
                                              ...
                    Ashok Kumar Tiwary                   ...   ...       Petitioner
                                       ­V e r s u s­
                    The State of Jharkhand & Another     ...     ...       Opposite Parties
                                              ...
                    CORAM: ­ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR.
                                              ...
                    For the Petitioner : ­ M/s Kumar Vimal, Indrajit Sinha, Advocates.
                    For the State      : ­ APP.
                                              ...
                                   
03/08.11.2011

This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 
10.12.2007, whereby the learned court below come to the conclusion 
that prima facie offences under Sections 379, 385, 341, 323, 506, 
166 & 34 I.P.C. are made out and directed the office clerk to issue 
summons against petitioner.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since 
petitioner   has  lodged   six  cases  against   the   complainant,  therefore, 
instant case was filed with malafide intention. 

From   perusal   of   three   charge   sheets,   annexed   with   this 
petition, I find that in all the cases, different persons were named as 
informant.   Thus,   petitioner   has   not   filed   those   cases   against 
complainant. So far other three cases are concerned, it is fairly stated 
by learned counsel for the petitioner that those cases are also filed by 
some other persons.

Under the aforesaid circumstance, I find that the complainant 
has   no   personal   grudge   against   the   petitioner,   thus   question   of 
malicious   prosecution   does   not   arise.   From   perusal   of   complaint 
petition and impugned order, I find that the learned court below had 
rightly come to the conclusion that the offences under Sections 379, 
385,   341,   323,   506,   166   &   34   I.P.C.   are   made   out   against   the 
petitioner.

Thus, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. 
Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

   (Prashant Kumar, J.)
sunil/