Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 865 (JHR)

Sandeep Agrawal @ Sandeep Kumar Jhunjhunwala v. State of Jharkhand

2006-07-14

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2006
Order Heard Mr. Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Vivek Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is either to delete or remove the name of the petitioner from the column of the accused of the FIR or to quash the said FIR so far as against the petitioner is concerned. 3. The facts in short are that, Bagodar P.S. Case No. 237/2004 was instituted, and was registered under Sections 467, 468,469,470,471,419,420,413,414, 379 and 120B IPC. In short the allegations in the FIR is that the. coal in question, which was illegally procured was being transported for black marketing on the basis of forged documents. 4. The point, which has been urged by the petitioner for quashing of the FIR against him is that no case of any criminal nature is made out against him and he has been unnecessarily arrayed as an accused in this Case. 5. It is stated by the petitioner that he is the owner of a registered Firm known as Mis Durga Coal Trading Company. On 23.9.2004 he had sold and dispatched the coal in question in favour of M/s Ajay Road Lines, Allahabad (U.P.) through a Truck bearing No. WB-37-9558. 6. According to allegations in the FIR, the informant in course of his patrolling duty received information that a Truck bearing No. WB-37-9558 was going from Nirsa Coalfield loaded with illegal and theft coal with forged documents. The informant intercepted the said truck at Bagodar Bazar on G.T. Road. The driver of the truck allegedly confessed that the coal loaded on the truck to be theft coal. Thereafter, the informant seized the coal as well as the Truck. 7. According to the petitioner, from Annexure-3/B, the certificate issued by the Dy. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Dhanbad Anchal it would be evident that he after making enquiry certified that the petitioner, on the basis of the license granted to his firm, had dispatched 22.500 M.T. of Coal worth Rs. 45,000/- to Ajay Road Lines, Allahabad (U.P.) by Truck No. WB-37-9558 and, therefore, petitioner had not committed any offence whatsoever. 8. The Dy. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Dhanbad Anchal it would be evident that he after making enquiry certified that the petitioner, on the basis of the license granted to his firm, had dispatched 22.500 M.T. of Coal worth Rs. 45,000/- to Ajay Road Lines, Allahabad (U.P.) by Truck No. WB-37-9558 and, therefore, petitioner had not committed any offence whatsoever. 8. The Dy. S.P., Giridih has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the Superintendent of Police and in para-5 of the counter affidavit he has admitted that the genuineness of the papers issued by the petitioner regarding the coal in question, were verified by the Dy. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, and he certified to be genuine by his letter dated 29.9.2004. It is further submitted in the counter affidavit that the genuineness of the papers was also verified by the Investigating Officer of the case and the papers were found to be genuine. 9. However, it is stated that the genuine coal, loaded from the firm of the petitioner, was unloaded somewhere in the midway illegally. 10. In view of the above statements made by the petitioner and admitted by the Superintendent of Police, the petitioner cannot be said to have any hand in the matter and, therefore, no case at all is made out against him. 11. In this view of the matter, this application is allowed and the FIR, i.e. Bagodar P.S. Case No. 0237/04, so far as against this petitioner only is hereby quashed.