[2025:JHHC:32663] 1 Cr. M.P. No.1722 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1722 of 2020 ------ 1. Bishun Pandit @ Visun Pandit aged about 45 years son of Sri Chandradeo Pandit, 2. Chandradeo Pandit aged about 65 years son of Kunwa Kumhar, 3. Jagdish Pandit aged about 43 years son of Sri Chandradeo Pandit, 4. Rani Devi aged about 62 years wife of Sri Jagdish Pandit, 5. Bikash Pandit @ Vikash Pandit aged about 17 years through his guardian father petitioner No.1 son of Sri Visun Pandit, 6. Hemia Devi aged about 42 years wife of Sri Vishun Pandit All resident of village Asnasingha, P.O.- Nagri, P.S.- Nimiaghat, District- Giridih … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sunita Devi wife of Manoj Turi resident of village Asnasingha, P.O.- Nagri, P.S.- Nimiaghat, District- Giridih … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S.K. Murtty, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, Addl.P.P. For the OP No.2 : Mr. Avishek Chandra, 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 with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of SC/ST Complaint Case No.86 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated [2025:JHHC:32663] 2 Cr. M.P. No.1722 of 2020 04.01.2020 and the said case is now pending before the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Giridih. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were members of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, caused hurt to the complainant, trespassed to her house, wrongfully restrained her and dragged her by catching hold of her hair, assaulted her, tore her blouse and saree and made her naked, caused bleeding injury to her and also caused her internal injury. On the basis of the complaint, the statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Giridih found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 341, 448, 354B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(w) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as amended by Act of 2015 and directed for issuance of summons. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations against the petitioners are false. The testimony of the inquiry witnesses is contradictory to each other. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand oppose the prayer of the petitioners made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and submits that the materials available in the record are sufficient to constitute each of the offences in respect of which the prima facie case has been found by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Giridih. It is next submitted that the contention of the petitioners that the allegations against them are false, is a subject matter of trial and at this stage, his defence cannot be [2025:JHHC:32663] 3 Cr. M.P. No.1722 of 2020 considered. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, 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 it is a settled principle of law that the defence of the petitioners and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused, cannot be considered by the High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 the Code of Criminal Procedure, as that would be job of the trial court as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Others reported in (2004) 2 Supreme 501. 7. 7. It is also a settled principle of law that a genuine prosecution cannot be stifled in exercise of the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr.) & Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 8. Now coming to the facts of the case, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of being members of an unlawful assembly, caused hurt to the complainant, wrongfully restrained her, trespassed to her house after making preparation of assaulting her, dragged her by catching hold of her hair, tore her blouse, outraged her modesty by tearing her blouse and saree besides abusing her by her caste name. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that if the entire allegations made against the petitioners are considered to be true in their entirety, then the offences in respect of which prima facie case was stated to have been made out by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act [2025:JHHC:32663] 4 Cr. M.P. No.1722 of 2020 Cases, Giridih, is in fact made out against the petitioners and the only contention of the petitioners that the allegations against them are false, is a defence of the petitioners which can only be taken in a full dress trial of the case. 10. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to accede to the prayer of the petitioners to quash the entire criminal proceeding of SC/ST Complaint Case No.86 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 04.01.2020 in exercise of the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 11. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 30th of October, 2025 AFR/ Saroj Uploaded on 03/11/2025