Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been preferred for quashing of the entire complaint case being Complaint Case No. 857 of 2007 and also the order dated 01.08.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi wherein summons have been issued against the petitioner for appearance in connection with Complaint Case No. 857 of 2007.

Brief facts of the present case is that a complaint case was registered by the complainant-opposite party No.2, namely, Govind Kumar Singh against the petitioner wherein in the complaint and the substance of which is also in this petition it is stated that the complainant was posted at Gola Road section as Permanent Way-1 (PW-1), worked in his own style and manner and did not obey the directions of controlling authority i.e. Asstt. Divisional Engineer, Muri. He worked at Gola Road section under Section Engineer (Permanent Way), Muri-II during the period from 23.07.2003 to 14.12.2006. On 14.8.2006 he threatened Jitendra Kumar Singh, the Assistant Divisional Engineer and controlling authority with dire consequences. ADEN,Muri reported the matter to civil authority, SP, Hazaribagh and requested to safety, vide letter No. Nil dated 14.08.2006. The matter was also reported to higher Railway authority. On the basis of misconduct and foul behaviour Govind Kumar Singh, PW-1, Gola Road was transferred to Bano and then to Govindpur of Hatia section as PW-1/Spl. vide Office Order No. PERS/RNC/29/06 dated 29.12.2006 which was objected to by Govind Kumar Singh, PW-1 and in this regard he has taken assistance from his friends, namely, Manoj Kumar, JE-I (P.Way) Safety Counselor/ Ranchi and Ranjeet Vishwarkarma, a railway employee. On 27.4.2007 Govind Kumar Singh, the complainant; Manoj Kumar and Ranjeet Vishwarkarma aggrieved with the transfer order of the complainant, all entered into the chambers of Divisional Engineer (South)/ Ranchi and attempted to catch hold of him. However, on hearing the shout some staffs of Engineering Department DEN office rushed immediately and took out Govind Kumar Singh, the complainant and his friends Manoj Kumar and Ranjeet Vishwarkarma. Then the matter was reported to officer-in-charge Jagannathpur , Hatia as well as to higher Railway authorities upon which a Complaint case was registered being a Complaint Case No. M.1403/2007 before SDM/Ranchi against the three culprits. Simultaneously, seeing the repeated misconduct, Departmental action was also taken. Consequent thereto on 01.05.2007 Govind Kumar Singh and on 02.05.2007 Manoj Kumar were suspended. Later on, on 17.05.2007 a charge sheet was issued against them. Thereafter, Govind Kumar Singh, the complainant had lodged an FIR on 03.05.2007 against Ramesh Kumar, Sr. DEN (Co)), Ranchi, the petitioner being FIR No. 77/2007 dated 03.05.2007. Later on the Complaint Case was filed before the CJM, Ranchi.

It appears on the above background that opposite party No. 2 had tried to initially lodge a case on 03.05.2007 with the local police station and subsequently when no headway was being made to his satisfaction, a complaint case was also lodged.

Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that on the basis of the First Information Report lodged by Govind Kumar Singh, the complainant, the matter was investigated and it was found that, "At the place of occurrence and in the presence of witnesses inquired into the incident and secretly conducted probe. Allegation levelled by the member of first party was not found. Tension is prevailing due to departmental works. Section 107 Cr.P.C. May be vacated".

The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complaint case against the petitioner has no sufficient ground and is simply based on malafide reason and is fit to be quashed.

The learned counsel has also pointed out to Annexure-6 to this petition which is a communication dated 14.08.2006 made to the Divisional Railway Manager, South-Eastern Railway, Ranchi regarding "report on obstructing the officer on duty, activity dangerous to the safety of track, negligence of duty and misconduct by Govind Kumar Singh, JE-II, GRE". He has also pointed out the another communication dated 14.08.2006 made to the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh which pertains to life threatening and activity dangerous to the safety of track by Govind Kumar Singh, JE-II, Golaroad.

The learned counsel has again pointed out to another communication dated 27.4.2007 made to the Sr. DSC, SE Railway, Ranchi which deals with the misbehaviour and life threatening to DEN/South by Govind Singh, JE-II/ P.Way/ Govindput and Manoj Kumar, JE/P.Way-cum-Safety Counsellor under DSO/RNC.

The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that all these Annexures pertain to behaviour that is prior to alleged incident of 03.05.2007 or 22.5.2007 shows character and nature of the complainant or opposite party No.2 herein.

The learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that petitioner is protected by umbrella of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also under the provisions of Railways Act and that the complainant Govind Kumar Singh who was put under suspension on 01.05.2007 for his misconduct for giving threatening to Assistant Divisional Engineer, SE Railway, Muri in his chambers on 13.08.2006. The learned counsel has also submitted that due to his activities the complainant was given a suspension order as early as on 01.05.2007 and thereafter pointed out that he was chargesheeted by the department on 17.5.2007. It is only after he was suspended on 01.05.2007 the complainant or opposite party No.2 herein instituted a case in the police station which was not sustained after the investigation. Thereafter he has filed a complaint case on 22.05.2007 indicating in the complaint about an incident of 03.05.2007 and 17.05.2007. It is obvious that whatever he is doing is because of his prior conduct and activity. Therefore, entire case against the petitioner Ramesh Kumar is fully concocted and malicious and has no full basis.

Apart from that, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the complainant or opposite party No.2 has not been appearing for many dates in this criminal miscellaneous petition and latest position is that Govind Kumar Singh, Ex. JE/P.Way, the complainant-opposite party No.2 is presently not in service and he has been terminated from service on 15.3.2019.

Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, the learned counsel for the State has, on the other hand, referred to the incidents of 03.05.2007 as well as 17.5.2007 and pointed out that the complaint case is fully sustainable as has been alleged.

Having gone through the petition as well as records available, I find that enough material has been laid before this Court which indicates that intra departmental issues are existing between the parties, of which, opposite party No.2 was much aggrieved and this is amply illustrated through Annexure-6 series to this petition. It seems that in the process of disciplinary action, he was suspended on 01.05.2007 by suspension order No. E/1/D&A/G.K.Singh/07 and then only he had instituted a case with the police station on 03.05.2007 against the petitioner, however, this was not found true. Thereafter, he lodged complaint case on 22.05.2007 in which incidents of 03.05.2007 and 17.05.2007 were indicated.

On being asked in Court today, that is, 19.03.2021 regarding any other substantial material or evidence regarding what has been stated in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the complaint case, the learned counsel for the State was unable to give any reply.

That apart from the aforesaid reasonings on the basis of which there does not seem to be much ground made out on behalf of the opposite party No.2. It is also seen that from the records of the case and the lack of attendance in many dates, he is no longer interested in pursuing this criminal miscellaneous petition.

Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for quashing of the entire complaint case being Complaint Case No. 857 of 2007 and also the order dated 01.08.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi by which summons have been issued against the petitioner for appearance in connection with Complaint Case No. 857 of 2007 are quashed.

Consequently, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and disposed of.