JUDGMENT : Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. Heard Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Chandra Prabha, learned S.C.IV., for the respondents. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Mandu P.S. Case No. 168 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1586 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the only allegation against the petitioner is of diversion of route which cannot be said to be a criminal offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the papers with respect to the coal which was being transported in the truck were found to be genuine. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention has referred to an order passed in W.P.(Cr.) No. 382 of 2015 dated 11.11.2016. 4. Mrs. Chandra Prabha, learned S.C.IV., for the respondents has opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and has submitted that instead of the coal being transported to Ormanjhi the same was destined for Varanasi for illegal trading and such facts makes out a case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. She has further submitted that charge sheet has already been submitted by the Police. She has however admitted that the documents which were produced with respect to the coal in question were found to be genuine. 5. The First Information Report was instituted alleging that confidential information was received that truck no. NL01K-0103 loaded with linkage coal for M/s. Gautam coal Works Pvt. Ltd., Ormanjhi was being transported towards Banaras Mandi instead of Ormanjhi. It is alleged that on such information checking was done and the truck was intercepted and the driver was also apprehended who has disclosed that he had loaded the truck at Topa Colliery which was transported to M/s Gautam Coal Works Pvt. Ltd., Ormanjhi but on the instruction of the owner of the truck and the owner of the company (petitioner) the coal was being diverted and transported to Varanasi. 6. Based on the aforesaid allegations Mandu P.S. Case No. 168 of 2015 was instituted. 7. It appears that there is no doubt with respect to the genuineness of the documents or with respect to the transaction relating to the coal which was being transported. 6. Based on the aforesaid allegations Mandu P.S. Case No. 168 of 2015 was instituted. 7. It appears that there is no doubt with respect to the genuineness of the documents or with respect to the transaction relating to the coal which was being transported. The petitioner is the owner of M/s Gautam Coal Works Pvt. Ltd., Ormanjhi to which the truck was destined but as it has been alleged that the same was being diverted and the coal was being transported to Varanasi. Thus the only allegation so far as the petitioner is concerned is with respect to diversion of the coal to a place other than the place to which it was intended. In the case of Abhas Kumar Acksaria & Others v. The State of Bihar & Others (Cr.W.J.C. No. 33 of 1991(R), a Division Bench of this Court had held that "deviation by a truck carrying coal to a place other than its destination cannot be a criminal offence either under the Indian Penal Code or under the Essential Commodities Act". In the said order, a note of caution was also given to the concerned police officials not to harass the bona fide transporters of coal in such manner. 8. The allegation made in the present case is virtually a replica of the allegation, which form the subject matter of W.P.(Cr.) No. 382 of 2015. Diversion of route as has been held by the Division Bench in Cr.W.J.C. No. 33 of 1991(R) can not constitute a criminal offence and since the allegation in the First Information Report has restricted itself only with respect to deviation of route as it was alleged to be going to Varanasi instead of Ormanjhi, continuation of the criminal proceedings as against the petitioner would be an abuse of the process of court and would lead to a miscarriage of justice and in similar consideration the entire criminal proceedings were quashed by this Court in W.P.(Cr.) No. 382 of 2015. 9. In view of what has been stated above, I find sufficient force in the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, accordingly this application is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Mandu P.S. Case No. 168 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1586 of 2015, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby, quashed and set aside. 10. 10. This application is allowed. Application allowed.