( 2026:JHHC:12551 ) 1 Cr. M.P. No.275 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.275 of 2026 ------ Abhishek Kumar Ojha, aged about 28 years, Son of Dayanand Ojha, Resident of 26A, Quarter No.21/A, Asansol, Durgapur Police Ayuktalaya, Post Office-Chittaranjan, Police Station-Chittaranjan, District- P.Bardhaman (West Bengal)-713331. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anup Kr. Agarwal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY I.A. No.5779 of 2026 Heard the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer for early hearing of the instant Cr.M.P. Since, the hearing of instant Cr.M.P. is taken up today, hence, this interlocutory application stands disposed of being infructuous. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Cr.M.P. No.275 of 2026 By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding in connection ( 2026:JHHC:12551 ) 2 Cr. M.P. No.275 of 2026 with Mihijam P.S. Case No.61 of 2025 including the order taking cognizance dated 09.09.2025 and the order dated 15.10.2025 by which charge has been framed against the petitioner as well as the FIR of Mihijam P.S. Case No.61 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meanwhile, 5 witnesses have been examined during the trial including the prosecutrix but the petitioner has not filed the copy of the deposition of the witnesses examined, in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner next relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare vs. The State of Maharashtra & Another reported in 2024 INSC 897 and submits that no offence is made out against the petitioner even if the entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true in their entirety, hence, it is lastly submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed. 5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that the petitioner has not come to court with clean hands and the petitioner has suppressed the facts from this court and the overwhelming evidence that has come on record in the trial by examination of 5 witnesses and deliberately the petitioner has suppressed the said fact from this Court by not filing the depositions of the witnesses and since the trial is at an advance stage, the exercise of the power under ( 2026:JHHC:12551 ) 3 Cr. M.P. No.275 of 2026 Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 at this belated stage would require appreciation of the evidence, which is not permissible law, hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding ought not be quashed. 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 the undisputed facts remain that during the trial, 5 witnesses including the prosecutrix has already been examined. The petitioner for the reason best known to him has suppressed the said depositions from this Court and have not filed the copy of the same. Since, 5 witnesses of the prosecution has been examined and they have supported the case of the prosecution and through them evidence has already been come on record; for arriving at the conclusion as to whether the same is sufficient to bring home the charge against the petitioner or not, requires appreciation of the evidence, which cannot be done by this Court in exercise of the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, more so, when the trial is at an advance stage before the trial Court. 7. 7. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P. is to be acceded to in exercise of the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. 8. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 28th of April, 2026 AFR/ Abhiraj Uploaded on 06/05/2026