BHUBNESHWAR PODDAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.

(2.) This appeal has been filed for the following relief:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants submits that earlier one case being S. C. /S. T. Case No. 98 of 2017 arising out of Devipur P. S. Case No. 44 of 2017 was filed by the complainant under Section 341 , 323 , 504 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (s) of S. C. and S. T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as aforesaid Act of 1989). He submits that after investigation of the case, final form was submitted and the complainant was issued notice, pursuant to which, the complainant filed protest petition on 23. 11. 2017 which was numbered as Protest cum S. C. & S. T. Case No. 68 of 2018. The learned counsel submits that the present case is a case of malicious prosecution, in as much as, the witnesses as well as the complainant of the present case are accused in the case filed by the present appellants and/or their family members. For this, he refers to a proceeding under Section 107 of Code of Criminal Procedure, which was instituted between the parties and numbered as Cr. Misc. Case No. 635/16 and ultimately the said case was dropped vide order dated 15. 04. 2017 as the period was already over. He further submits that one F. I. R was also registered by the present appellants against the informant of the present case in which the witnesses are the accused. He further submits that all the witnesses of the present case are interested witnesses.