Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 595 (RAJ)

Jagdish Arora v. State of Rajasthan

2012-03-06

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the proceedings arising out of F.I.R. No. 393/2008 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nimbaheda for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 120B Indian Penal Code and Section 19/54 of the Excise Act. 3. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners are Directors and Manager of the Company named Som Distilleries and Breweries Ltd. which is involved in the manufacture and sale of liquor. The production and distribution of the liquor manufactured by the Company is done under the supervision of the District Excise Officer as per the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Distilleries rules and the Excise Act of the State. All the issuance of liquor etc. from the factory warehouse is monitored by the Excise Officer concerned and each and every consignment of liquor which is passed out from the warehouse is entered in the register maintained by the Excise Officer. 4. A recovery of liquor manufactured by the company was effected by the officers of the Police Station, Nimbaheda on 15.10.2008 from a truck No. NL02-D-4171. The truck was being driven by one Santosh and the other person sitting in the truck was one Rajkumar. The accused sitting in the truck informed the raiding party that they were having cotton seeds in the truck and the builty for cotton seeds was also produced before the police officer but on the search of the truck being taken, about 1065 cartons of liquor manufactured by the company for the purpose of sale in Arunachal Pradesh were found. On the basis of this, F.I.R. No. 393/2008 was registered and investigation commenced. During the course of investigation, the accused present in the truck disclosed that the person who have engaged him for transportation of the liquor were Billa, Banti Samra and Pappu who had entrusted the truck to them and Billa had instructed them that he would be escorting the truck and instructing them over mybile phone from time to time, The busily found was forged. During the course of investigation, the record of the company was taken from the Incharge, Excise Officer and specific query was put to the Excise Officer regarding the export of the liquor recovered having been done from the premises of the company. During the course of investigation, the record of the company was taken from the Incharge, Excise Officer and specific query was put to the Excise Officer regarding the export of the liquor recovered having been done from the premises of the company. The Excise Officer gave reply on 24.11.2008 to the S.H.O., P.S. Nimbaheda as per which, it was informed to the S.H.O. that the export of the seized liquor has not been done from the premises of the company or by the company. Despite that, the S.H.O. has arrayed the petitioners as accused in the case and while filing the charge-sheet against two arrested accused, has kept the proceedings pending against the petitioners under Section 173(8) Criminal Procedure Code Hence, the instant petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings gutta the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all the liquor which is sent out from the factory premises is so exported under the direct and administrative control of the Excise Officers. The record of the company about the liquor manufactured and exported is maintained and a monthly statement of production and other activities is also sent to the Excise Commissioner. The goods which are passed out from the factory premises are only permitted to leave the premises of the company under a valid permit granted by the excise authorities. It is submitted that the information has been given to the S.H.O. by the concerned Excise Officer attached to the company that no liquor as mentioned in the F.I.R. was sent out from the premises of the company. Thus, it is submitted that having regard to the documentary evidence available on the record as per which no illicit liquor has been sent out from the premises of the company, the proposed prosecution of the petitioners in this case is absolutely unwarranted. It is submitted that in view of the fact that the Excise Officer Incharge of the affairs has clearly given an information. to the Investigating Officer regarding the seized liquor not having been exported from the company, the proceedings of F.I.R. have wrongly been kept pending against the petitioners. It is thus prayed that the facts of the case call for the exercise of the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings of the F.I.R. qua the petitioners. 6. It is thus prayed that the facts of the case call for the exercise of the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings of the F.I.R. qua the petitioners. 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made in the misc. petition and has submitted that the petitioners have not even joined the investigation and the burden of proof is against the petitioners to explain as to how the liquor manufactured in their factory come to be in possession of the accused who were apprehended with the liquor and it is only on the satisfactory explanation about the liquor being given that the petitioners can escape their liability under the Excise Act. Thus, it is submitted that the F.I.R. impugned and the proceedings thereupon do not call for any interference by this Court for quashing the validly initiated prosecution in the matter. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced at bar and have gone through the certified copy of the charge-sheet placed on the record. 8. Admittedly, in this case, the driver and khallasi of the truck on being apprehended did not give any information implicating the petitioners of any of the representative of the manufacturer as being involved in this case. The record which the Investigating Officer sought has been supplied by the Excise Officer who is on the helm of affairs as regards the export of liquor from the factory premises is concerned, the said record shows that the liquor which has been seized in this case was not exported from the factory premises of the company. Thus, the prosecution of the petitioners appears to be absolutely unjustified in this case. In any event, even if for the arguments sake, it is accepted that the liquor was illegally sent out of the premises of the company, then also, there is absolutely no material on the record to show that it was so sent out for the purpose of being transported through Rajasthan. In any event, even if for the arguments sake, it is accepted that the liquor was illegally sent out of the premises of the company, then also, there is absolutely no material on the record to show that it was so sent out for the purpose of being transported through Rajasthan. As such, even if the allegations of the prosecution regarding the involvement of office bears of the company in the offence are accepted, then too, the offences which supposedly have been committed by them could only have been in relation to the illegal act which took place in Madhya Pradesh and a separate case ought to have been registered under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Excise Act for the same. Thus, it is apparent that further continuance of the investigation in the impugned F.I.R. to the extent of the petitioners, is absolutely unwarranted. 9. The upshot of the above discussion is that the instant misc. petition succeeds and the proceedings of the impugned F.I.R. No. 393/2008 registered at P.S. Nimbaheda qua the petitioners are hereby quashed.Stay petition also stands disposed of.Petition allowed. *******