XXX vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHAILENDRA KUMAR TIWARI Spl.P.P., ,RAMCHANDER SAHU,SAVITA KUMARI — Cr.M.P./1327/2026
Case under An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 354(D),IPC,67(A),IT,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 05th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010133092026
Filing Number
Cr.M.P./8577/2026
Filing Date
20-04-2026
Registration No
Cr.M.P./1327/2026
Registration Date
01-05-2026
Judge
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Coram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Quashing Matter ( 206 )
Sub-Category
Quashing of Entire Criminal Proceedings ( 7 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
05th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
XXX
Adv. GAUTAM KUMAR,SANJAY KUMAR,SANJAY KUMAR, ,ASHUTOSH KUMAR SINHA,SANJAY KUMAR
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SHAILENDRA KUMAR TIWARI Spl.P.P., ,RAMCHANDER SAHU,SAVITA KUMARI
INFORMANT
VICTIM
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Fresh Filing (Admission)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Fresh Filing (Admission) |
Orders
Case Summary: Cr.M.P. No.1327/2026 Decision: The High Court of Jharkhand quashed and set aside FIR Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2023 under IPC Section 354(D) and IT Act Section 67A. Key Reasoning: The court found this was a private dispute between family members (petitioner, informant uncle, and victim cousin) with complete settlement and compromise. Since the offences were not heinous crimes, the conviction prospects were remote and bleak, and continuation would constitute abuse of process causing extreme injustice despite full settlement, quashing was warranted under inherent jurisdiction principles established in Parbatbhai Aahir case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Cr.M.P. No.1327/2026 Decision: The High Court of Jharkhand quashed and set aside FIR Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2023 under IPC Section 354(D) and IT Act Section 67A. Key Reasoning: The court found this was a private dispute between family members (petitioner, informant uncle, and victim cousin) with complete settlement and compromise. Since the offences were not heinous crimes, the conviction prospects were remote and bleak, and continuation would constitute abuse of process causing extreme injustice despite full settlement, quashing was warranted under inherent jurisdiction principles established in Parbatbhai Aahir case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts