The Jharkhand High Court has held that summons in a criminal case cannot be issued against a post or designation without mentioning the name of the person holding that post.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary observed that a post is not a juristic person and quashed criminal proceedings against two petitioners who had been summoned merely by their posts.

The Court was hearing a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of proceedings arising from a complaint case, including the order dated August 5, 2023, by which a Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ranchi found a prima facie case for offences under Sections 323, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons.

The dispute arose from the financing of a 12-wheeler vehicle by M/S Hinduja Leyland Finance Limited to the complainant in September 2013. According to the complaint, the vehicle, which was carrying coal, was stopped and seized on March 2, 2015. It was alleged that Sanjay Singh, a staff member, and Vikash Kumar, the Branch Manager, assaulted the driver, took ₹50,000 from him and seized the vehicle.

On the basis of the complaint, the complainant's statement on solemn affirmation and the statements of inquiry witnesses, the Magistrate found a prima facie case and issued summons. The petitioners approached the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of the proceedings. Counsel for the petitioners relied on the High Court's decision in ATC Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Jharkhand, which in turn referred to the coordinate Bench decision in Suma Devi v. State of Jharkhand & Ors. It was contended that the Court had reiterated in Suma Devi that summons in a criminal case cannot be issued to a post without mentioning the name of the person holding the post, since a post is not a juristic person.

The petitioners further contended that the allegations were false and that even if the complaint, the complainant's statement on solemn affirmation and the statements of the inquiry witnesses were accepted in their entirety, the alleged offences were not made out.

Considering the matter, the High Court reiterated the settled principle that a criminal summons cannot be directed merely against a post without identifying the person occupying it. The Court observed:

“It is a settled principle of law that summons in a criminal case cannot be issued to a post without mentioning the name of the person who is holding the post.”

It consequently held that the Magistrate had committed a “grave illegality” by issuing summons against petitioner nos. 2 and 3 by their posts without mentioning the names of the persons holding those posts.

The Court further held that continuation of the criminal proceedings against them would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the High Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings, including the order taking cognizance and the summoning order dated August 5, 2023, insofar as petitioner nos. 2 and 3 were concerned.

Case Title: M/S Hinduja Leyland Finance Limited and Ors v. State of Jharkhand and Anr

Case Number: Cr.M.P. No. 1712 of 2025

Appearance:

For the Petitioners: Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate

For the State: Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Addl. PP

For O.P. No. 2: Mr. Santosh Kr. Tiwari, Advocate; Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Order