IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.1052 of 2009 ASHOK KUMAR DUBEY & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4. 22.7.2010. Heard Sri Chitranjan Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. In spite of issuing notices to the complainant she has not chosen to appear. It is an illustrative case as to how one could be humiliated and spit at. The two petitioners are employees of superseded Patna Regional Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as P.R.D.A) and the third petitioner, namely, Pushpa Dubey is the wife of petitioner no.1 who was, on the day of supercession of the above authority, the Executive Engineer of that authority. This could probably give an inkling as to how the facts have been framed as to humiliating the whole lot innocent persons and that too on allegations which could hardly be acceptable to any reasonable, conscientious person. The allegation is that the complainant was running a sweet meat shop within the Maurya Lok Complex and was having as clients the three - 2 - petitioners who used to visit his shop to have refreshments as indicated in the complaint petition and did never pay. The credit price accumulated but no specific amount has been stated in the complaint petition as an instance of the nefarious acts of the present set of the petitioners. It is alleged that on 7.1.2008 the three petitioners went into the shop of the complainant at about 7 P.M., took refreshment and when were asked to pay, petitioners Ashok Kumar Dubey and Nirmal Kumar Choubey gave a push to Sanjay Kumar one of the employees of the shop and went near the complainant Meera Gupta. It is alleged that petitioner Ashok Kumar Dubey took out Rs.4,000/- from the cash box while Nirmal Kumar Choubey drew out Rs.7015 from it and without paying up for the price of what they had eaten, they went out. There are other allegations which are contained in the complaint petition and which speak of the high connections of the petitioners with some higher authorities and on that account their systematic acts of illtreating and torturing the vendors or shopkeepers of that particular complex. On the above allegations the complaint petition was - 3 - filed which ultimately resulted in the summoning order passed on 25.2.2008. The contention is that in fact the complainant had a kiosk and she had encroached upon some public lands of the complex which was measured by petitioners no.1 and 2 in discharge of their duties and they served a notice upon the complainant for removing the encroachment on 9.8.2007 and, accordingly, the land was measured and the encroached area was 559-37 sq.ft. was freed from the illegal possession of the complainant. The complainant came before this court in C.W.J.C.No.2148 of 2008 and that petition was disposed of by an order dated 2.6.2008 with a direction to the petitioners for making fresh measurement and further direction to the complainant that she has to pay a particular amount as using charges at the rate of Rs.2/-per square feet per day. It was submitted that it was a huge amount which was likely to be paid by the complainant as using charges which was on account of the actions taken by the petitioners no.1 and 2 and that infuriated the complainant to go into slinging mud upon the faces of public servants like the - 4 - two petitioners and an innocent person like the wife of petitioner no.1. It was contended that an out and out vexatious and malicious prosecution has been launched only to spiting at the accused which flows from a deep sense of vengeance which could be developing on account of the facts which were noticed by this court in the orders passed in the above noted writ case. After having considered the facts of the case and after having considered the circumstances under which the complainant has filed a false and vexatious complaint, it appears an act of rubbing malice and vengeance upon the office bearers of an authority which had some duties to perform in discharge of their public functions. It further appears that the complainant had foisted out and out a false complaint petition which is based on malicious false statements of facts. It is simply absurd and improbable to think that the officer in the rank of petitioner no.1 along with his wife like petitioner no.3 will enter into his shop and in such busy place in Maurya Lok Complex would indulge in such activities. The whole purpose of filing the complaint - 5 - petition appears to this court painting the petitioners into the dirtiest of colours and putting them into the sense of realization that public servants will have to be afraid of unscrupulous elements like the complainant who could make allegations of the nature as was leveled by the complainant. The Court feels that innocent public servants should be protected from such nefarious acts of leveling allegations by person like the complainant and keeping that in mind the proceeding initiated by the above cognizance order in the above noted complaint case is hereby quashed. Petition is allowed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )