IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (C) No. 5148 of 2008
1. Hari Prasad Agrawal @ H.P. Agrawal
2. Hemant Mahto
3. Sitaram Sharma
4. Smt. Birsi Devi
5. Ram Chandra Sahu ... Petitioners
Versus
1. Ashok Sahu
2. Bijay Kumar Sahu
3. Maninder Singh
4. Manoj Singh
5. Sanjay Kumar Singh
6. State of Jharkhand ... Respondents
.............
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
.............
For the Petitioners Mr. Amit Kumar Das
For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 Mr. S.N. Gupta
For the State J.C. to G.P.-I
.............
8/ Dated: 24th of August, 2009
1. The present petition has been preferred against the
order passed by learned Additional Munsif-I, Ranchi dated
12th September, 2008 in Title Suit No. 27 of 2003 whereby
an application preferred by the present petitioner (original
defendant) for production of certain record from Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ranchi was dismissed.
2. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and
looking to the affidavit, filed by the respondents and as
submitted by learned Advocate General of the State that
record of Case No. M-1031 of 1995 is not traceable and now
it is not available with the respondents. In the matter
between the original plaintiff and original defendant in Title
Suit No. 27 of 2003, an original defendant has given an
application for production of papers of Case No. M-1031 of
1995, which are the proceedings under Section 144 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure. In fact, there is no direct nexus
with proceeding and the right, title or interest, claimed by
the original plaintiff in the title suit. It is stated in the
affidavit, filed by the respondents that they are going to
initiate action against the erring officer, who is responsible
for loss of record. Relevant part of affidavit is paragraph 3,
filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi dated 18th
August, 2009, which reads as under:
2.
“3. That the instant writ petition was taken up on 17.08.09 and
the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court has directed the Deputy
Commissioner, Ranchi to furnish undertaking that suitable
action against the person responsible for missing the record of
case no. M 1031/95 under section 144 Cr.P.C. will be taken. In
pursuant to the above order/direction passed on 17.08.09 by the
Hon’ble Court, the deponent hereby undertakes that the matter
will be thoroughly examined and suitable action against the
person responsible for missing the above record, will be taken.”
3. Looking to the facts of the present case and impugned
order, no error has been committed by the trial Court, much
less, an error on the face of the record and also for the
reason that as record of case no. M- 1031 of 1995 under
Section 144 of Cr.P.C. is not available with the Government,
there is no substance in this writ petition and, hence, the
same is, hereby, dismissed.
(D.N. Patel, J.)
Ajay/