Pradeep Puri And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand

The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conferencing today at 11.00 A.M. They have no

complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

Heard the parties.

The petitioners, in this application, have challenged the order dated 11.09.2019, by which cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 302,

341, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been taken and, thereafter, summons have been issued to the petitioners to appear.

Mr. Shikarwar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that no offence is made out so far as these petitioners are concerned, which

would be apparent from the entire FIR. He submits that earlier charge sheet was submitted for the offence under Section 323, 341, 504, 120 (B)/34

I.P.C., but the court below took cognizance under Section 302 IPC also. He submits that the said cognizance was taken only against petitioner nos. 1

& 2, who approached this Court for quashing of the same and the matter was remanded to the Magistrate for passing a fresh order. He further

submits that thereafter the Magistrate has taken cognizance and issued summon to all the petitioners, which is absolutely bad and there are no

materials against them. He further submits that there was no injury on the person of the deceased, who is a minor girl aged about 04 years. He further

submits that none of the witnesses has submitted that all the petitioners have taken part in the occurrence and committed murder. He submits that it is

not at all a murder, rather the girl slipped and fell in a well while she was playing resulting in her death. He submits that even if from the FIR any

offence is made out, that can simply be of assault on the family members of the deceased and of abusing them and for which no cognizance under

Section 302 IPC can be taken.

I have gone through the FIR and also the case diary. There is allegation that the girl, who was aged about 04 years, was thrown in a well and when

the informant party went to the house of the petitioners, they were assaulted and abused. Whether the act is of murder or not has to be looked into at

an appropriate stage.

So far as the materials, which are available on record, are concerned, the same suggests that the girl was thrown in a well. This allegation definitely

makes out an offence to take cognizance under Section 302 IPC. So far as the allegation of assault is concerned, I find that the same is there in the

FIR that the informant parties were assaulted by the petitioners. This prima-facie also makes out an offence under Sections 323 and 341 IPC.

Thus, when these offences are made out, the court below has committed no illegality in taking cognizance of the aforesaid offence. So far as issuing

of summons are concerned, I find that there are materials to issue summons against all the accused persons. Even the statement recorded under

Section 164 Cr.P.C. suggests that there are materials to take cognizance and issue summons.

So far as the acts of each individual petitioner are concerned, the same can be looked into at the time of framing of charge. Whether they can be

charged under Section 302 IPC or in other Sections of the Indian Penal Code, that can only be looked into at the time of framing of charge based on

the materials on record. Liberty is always reserved to each individual petitioner to file an appropriate application before the court below at the time of

framing of charge seeking discharge, which can be looked into by the court below at that stage.

So far as the order dated 11.09.2019, which is in relation to taking cognizance and issuing summon, is concerned, I find no illegality in it, as prima-facie

cognizable offence is made out. Accordingly, I am not inclined to interfere with the same.

Thus, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands dismissed.