Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.16505 of 2009 ====================================================== Rajeev Verma, son of late Bageshwari Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Belbanwa, P.S.-Motihari Town, District- East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Ram Pd. Pathak, son of late Harihar Pd. Pathak, at village- Saidpur, P.S.-Singhwara, District- Saran .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. U. S. Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. R. B. Roy ‘Raman’, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 3/ 19-04-2012 Heard the parties. The petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceeding including order dated 20.02.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, in Complaint Case No.3325 of 2006 (Tr. No.3399 of 2009) by which he has taken cognizance under [STATUTE] . The case of the Complainant, who was the Halka Karamchari, is that the petitioner, who was Block Development Officer, was consistently harassing him and when he made complaint to the higher officials he allegedly called him to his Chamber, abused and put him under suspension. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he was posted as Block Development Officer, Garkha Block, in December, 2006, while the complainant was posted as Halka Karamchari. The Complainant was extremely arrogant and constantly disobeying the orders of the higher officials on account of which the office work was suffering. In fact, it was the complainant himself who had misbehaved with the petitioner in Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16505 of 2009 (3) dt.19-04-2012 2 / 2 2 his chamber on account of which he was put under suspension. When some witnesses were examined during enquiry under section 202 Cr. P. C., the Magistrate was not satisfied with the allegation levelled against the petitioner and, therefore, called for a report from the Collector, Saran, with regard to the allegations. The Collector, Saran, sent a report on 16.03.2007 stating therein that the complainant was a corrupt and inefficient person and was causing obstruction in the office work of all the officials and, so, he should be sufficiently punished. Despite this report, the Magistrate took cognizance in the matter ignoring the said report. Notices had been issued to the Opposite Party No.2, who has appeared through duly executed Vakalatnama but none appears on his behalf for the second successive date. Having gone through the background facts of the case, I am convinced that the present complaint is malicious and is a sheer abuse of the process of Court. In view of such, entire proceeding including order dated 20.02.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Chapra, in Complaint Case No.3325 of 2006 (Tr. No.3399 of 2009) taking cognizance under [STATUTE] is hereby quashed. Application stands allowed. JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 504

Statute Text:
Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Insult intended to provoke breach of the peace. Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.