(2025:JHHC:23664) 1 Cr. M.P. No.2373 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2373 of 2020 ------ 1. Narayan Giri, Aged about 77 Years now 79 Years, Son of Late Bhola Giri 2. Brahma Giri, Aged about 39 Years now 41 Years, Son of Sri Narayan Giri 3. Gokhul Giri, Aged about 40 Years, Son of Narayan Giri 4. Bhim Giri, Aged about 37 Years, Son of Sri Narayan Giri 5. Ravi Giri, Aged about 23 Years, Son of Sri Brahma Giri, All Resident of Village- Junori, P.O.- Taranari, P.S.- Chandrapura, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jagdish Mahto, Son of Late Puran Mahto, Resident of Village- Junori, P.O.- Taranari, P.S.- Chandrapura, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Mahesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, AC to SC (L&C) III For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Neil Abhijit Toppo, Advocate ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 02.06.2018 in connection with Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.765 of 2017 in which the learned Magistrate has found prima facie sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioners for having committed (2025:JHHC:23664) 2 Cr. M.P. No.2373 of 2020 the offences punishable under Sections 323, 506, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners committed theft of one quintal of fish from the pond settled by the government in favour of the complainant-informant and thus in possession of the complainant and when the complainant forbade them not to commit theft of the fish, they criminally intimidated the complainant. On the basis of the statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the enquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate found prima facie case for the said offences. The petitioners, however, have not filed the copy of the statement of the enquiry witnesses, for the reasons best known to them. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is false. The petitioner No.1 has also filed a complaint case. It is next submitted that the order by which the learned A.C.J.M, Bermo at Tenughat has found prima facie case, is bad in law. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer of the petitioners, as made in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioners and submit that the enquiry witnesses have categorically stated about the commission of each of the offences punishable under Section 323/506/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and deliberately, the petitioners have withheld the statement of the enquiry witnesses and have not come to the court with clean hands. It is further submitted that the contention of the petitioners that they are (2025:JHHC:23664) 3 Cr. M.P. No.2373 of 2020 innocent, is the defence which they can take during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323/506/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to interfere with the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 02.06.2018 in connection with Protest-cum- Complaint Case No.765 of 2017; in exercise of the power of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed. 8. In view of disposal of the instant Cr.M.P., the interim relief granted earlier vide order dated 16.08.2021, is vacated. 9. Registry is directed to intimate the court concerned forthwith. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 14th of August, 2025 AFR/ Animesh