JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON SYED TARIQUE ALAM V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.

RANCHI, India, Nov. 4 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Oct. 6:

1. Heard the parties.

2. Though the opposite party No.2 is appearing through the Advocate but no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash the order dated 13.05.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Criminal Revision No.20 of 2024 whereby and where under the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh has dismissed the criminal revision which was filed challenging the order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh in connection with Katkamsandi (Pelawal) P.S. Case No. 65 of 2016 whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh has rejected the application filed under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the petitioner and also to quash the order dated 04.03.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh and further to quash the order dated 08.07.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh whereby and where under charge has been framed against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Section 341, 322, 504, 506, 420, 467, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons has got a power of attorney executed by the son of the informant and the informant claims his son as a mentally weak and sick person and also made him sign the sale deed executed and the co-accused persons along with the petitioner abused the informant when the informant desisted the petitioner from selling the informant's land. The petitioner filed a petition of discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Vide order dated 04.03.2024, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribagh rejected the same and subsequently vide order dated 08.07.2024, has framed charges inter alia against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Section 323, 341, 504, 506, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that even though the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety, still none of the offences in respect of which the charge has been framed against the petitioner is made out.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=bzPoyUlszYLCUcCpirIpqBxDWrnweJrR2mF1CRyUI1z3FQrMv04uUi9H0sO%2B%2BQT6&caseno=Cr.M.P./2117/2024&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010216982024&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.