Anil Kumar and Anr vs State Of Bihar and Anr
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22225 of 2017
CNR No. BRHC010162752017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1521 Year-2016 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Anil Kumar son of Late Anant Deo Narain Prasad, resident of Village New
Bus Stand, Bettiah, Police Station- Bettiah Town, District- West Champaran.
2. Sanjay Kumar, son of Shri Krishna Prasad, resident of Village- Bal Krishna
Colony, Police Station- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Dipendra Kumar Verma, son of Shri Arun Kumar Prasad, resident of
Village- Dhankutwa, Police Station- Balthar, District- West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-10-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the Opposite
Party No.2.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of the
order dated 28.03.2017, passed by learned Additional Chief
th
Judicial Magistrate- 6 , Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection
with Complaint Case No. 1521 of 2016, whereby and whereunder
cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 342, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22225 of 2017 dt.29-10-2026
2/5
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant used to
work in a cement company for the intervening period between
2013 to 2015, when he was engaged for a monthly remuneration of
Rs. 4500/-. It has been alleged that the petitioners used to give
only Rs. 1500/- as monthly wage and used to retain Rs. 3000/- per
month. The total dues amount exceeded up to Rs. 90,000/-, when
the complainant requested the petitioners to pay the dues amount,
the petitioners in turn adopted a evasive attitude, and the
complainant was abused and assaulted by the petitioners. It has
further been alleged that a threat was given by the petitioners after
putting a pistol on the forehead of the complainant stating that, if
the informant come next time, he will be killed, upon query by the
court, the complainant stated that there was no documentary proof
of the money which he received from the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that
the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. It has
further been submitted that the complainant was an employee of
the petitioners and petitioner No.1, prior to the lodging of the
present case, had instituted Town P.S. Case No. 556 of 2015,
registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and
471, against the complainant, alleging that the complainant has
fraudulently sold about 500 bags of cement when the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22225 of 2017 dt.29-10-2026
3/5
were ill. It has further been submitted that from bare perusal of the
allegations as levelled in the complaint petition, no criminal
offence is made out, even presuming that what has been alleged is
true without admitting the remedy of the complainant was to file a
case before an appropriate forum in accordance with law seeking
his arrears of salary, and resorting to criminal case, it only reflects
that the complainant was trying to coerce the petitioners into
submission to compromise the Town P.S. Case No. 556 of 2015,
lodged against the complainant. It has further been submitted,
referring to one of the annexures as annexed with the
supplementary affidavit, that the complainant had already
approached the concerned authority by filing an application before
the learned Assistant Labour Commissioner for payment of his
dues amount on 31.08.2015 and the present case came to be filed
on 30.08.2016. It has further been submitted that a civil dispute
has been given the colour of a criminal cloak. It has further been
submitted referring to the reply given by the complainant upon the
Court’s query in the solemn affirmation, that there was no
documentary proof of payment between the parties. It has further
been submitted that the present prosecution against the petitioners
is malicious in nature and has been filed with an intention to wreak
vengeance.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22225 of 2017 dt.29-10-2026
4/5
4.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further relied
upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal ; reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC
335 , and has submitted that the case of the petitioners falls under
various categories as discussed in paragraph-102 of the said
judgment.
4.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied
upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Pepsi Foods Ltd. And Another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate
And Others , reported in (1998) 5 Supreme Court Cases 749 , and
has submitted that the summoning order should not be a
mechanical one and the learned Magistrate must apply his judicial
mind so as to come to a finding that a prima facie case is made
out, and a mechanical summoning order as in the present case
without application of judicial mind should be quashed.
5. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned
counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has vehemently opposed the
prayer of the petitioners. Learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2
has further submitted that the intention of the petitioners was to
cheat the complainant from the very initial and the case against
him was filed only as a retaliatory counter-blast, and the order
taking cognizance is good in law and facts both.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22225 of 2017 dt.29-10-2026
5/5
6. Heard the parties and perused the record.
7. Prior to the lodging of the present case, petitioner
No.1 had earlier lodged a case against the complainant/Opposite
Party No.2 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the
I.P.C. on 23.08.2015, after lodging of the present case the
complainant filed an application on 31.08.2015, before the learned
Assistant Labour Commissioner and Employment Department,
Bettiah, for payment of his dues amount and, after one year, the
present case came to be lodged on 31.08.2016. The present
prosecution appears to be a malicious one and in view of the
judgments as discussed above, and in the facts and circumstances,
the impugned order dated 28.03.2017, passed by learned
th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- 6 , Bettiah, West
Champaran, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1521 of 2016,
is hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Abdus/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 02.11.2026
Transmission Date 02.11.2026