RAM PRAKASH MEENA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Arbind Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings arising out of C/1 Case No.4714 of 2013 including the order taking cognizance dtd. 20/1/2016, pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class at Jamshedpur. The further prayer is made for quashing the order dtd. 24/6/2016, whereby, bailable warrant of arrest has been directed be issued against the petitioners.

(3.) The complaint case was filed by opposite party no.2 alleging therein that he is a senior citizen and because of his advance age, he could not look after his property situated at his native village and authorized his younger brother, namely, Srinivas Rai to look after and manage the aforesaid property situated at near Gurdi Market, P.S. Bagbera, Town Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum. It was further alleged that the complainant informed the Railways authority about this his act. The Railways allotted the aforesaid plot but increased the rate of yearly rent arbitrarily by multiplying, for which a writ petition being W.P(C) No.1857 of 2009 was filed before this Court. The complainant applied for mutation of his name before the Assistant Engineer, South Eastern Railway, Tatanagar on 6/8/1984 and on subsequent dates. It was also alleged that the local Railway Officers were threatening for taking coercive step by the help of local administration and to that effect news was published in local Hindi newspaper on 1/11/2013. It was further alleged that the representations were made to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhalbhum at Jamshedpur on 20/11/2013, but EC No. 05 of 2011 was filed before the Estate Officer, South Eastern, Chakradharpur, wrongly in the name of the complainant's brother, namely, Sri Nivas Rai, which was disposed of on 26/9/2013 passed by the said Estate Officer in respect of the aforesaid land in question. Sri Nivas Rai preferred a Misc. Case No.17 of 2013 against the said ex-parte order dtd. 26/9/2013 before the court of the learned Principal District Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, which was dismissed. It was also alleged that on 18/11/2013, the petitioner no.1 in collusion and connivance with petitioner no.2 and his subordinate staff trespassed into the complainant's aforesaid house premises in his absence and damaged the belongings of the complainant and assaulted, insulted, outraging the dignity of the complainant's brother and threatened his brother Srinivas Rai unauthorizedly and further warned him to demolish the structures of the complainant. However, because of strong objection made by the neighbouring people of the locality, the petitioners returned back along with their staff. According to the complainant, the offence under Ss. 323/426/448/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code was made out as against the petitioners.