HARU SK. Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dated 3.1.2012 passed by learned Magistrate, Rajmahal in P.C.R. Case No. 68 of 2011, is being sought to be quashed on the ground that the instant case is an outcome of malicious prosecution. Mr. Gautam Kumar, learned counsel appearing, for the petitioners submits that the first information report was lodged alleging therein about commission of the offence under Sections 436/426/34 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered as Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S. Case No. 160 of 2010, G.R. No. 312 of 2010.

(2.) The matter was investigated upon and during investigation, the I.O. did find that since the petitioners had lodged the case against the informant party, therefore, a false case has been lodged by the Informant against these petitioners and, thereby, final form was submitted.

(3.) On submission of the final form, a protest petition was lodged, which was treated to be a complaint in which cognizance of the offence has been taken against these petitioners under Sections 436/426/34 of the Indian Penal Code vide order dated 3.1.2012, which is under challenge.