Dilip Kumar Choudhary vs State of Meghalaya

Mr. Dinesh Maheshwari, C.J.(Oral)—By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of two FIRs lodged by the respondent No. 2, one being at Police Station, Nongpoh bearing No. 111 (5) of 2015 for offence under Section 392 IPC and the other being at the Police Station, Williamnagar bearing Case No. 69 (6) of 2015 for offences under Section 120 (B)/465/468/379/34 IPC.

The relevant factual aspects of the matter are that in the first FIR dated 12.05.2015, lodged at Umsning Out-Post, District Ri Bhoi, the respondent No. 2 has alleged detention of two of his trucks bearing registration No. ML 07 B 1477 and ML 07 B 1419 at gun point by a gang led by the petitioner while they were passing through Umsning, District Ri Bhoi. In the other FIR, lodged at Williamnagar Police Station on 22.06.2015, the complainant has alleged that his three empty coal trucks bearing registration No. ML 07 B 1411, ML 07 B 2012 and ML 07 B 1475, which were parked near the Petrol Pump, Nengkhra, were stolen on 15.06.2015 by the present petitioner and other persons.

It was also alleged in the second FIR at Williamnagar Police Station that it was after the arrest of the present petitioner in connection with the said other FIR that the facts came to surface about his misdeeds with his gang, who had also prepared certain documents of agreements by forging the complainant�s signatures with lawful motive to snatch away the trucks from his lawful custody and to deprive him of his property.

The petitioner has questioned the aforesaid FIRs with the submissions that he was a high profile honest businessman having his Petrol Pump at Bongaigaon, Assam and was also dealing in coal business in the State of Assam and Meghalaya. According to the petitioner, he had business relations with the respondent No. 2, who intended to sell five trucks to him wherefor, an agreement was executed between the parties on 18.08.2012, which was notarised on 21.08.2012; and then, another agreement was executed on 15.11.2012 which was notarised on 06.12.2012, whereby the respondent No. 2 agreed to sell three more trucks to him.

The case of the petitioner is that in terms of such agreements, he had taken over the possession of trucks; and he was not only plying the same, but also made payment for liquidation of the loan amount over the vehicles. According to the petitioner, after liquidation of the loan amount, when he asked for the transfer of vehicles, the respondent No. 2 refused to do so and demanded more money. The petitioner has alleged that for this reason, he has lodged an FIR against the respondent No. 2 for offences under Section 387/506 IPC, which is duly registered as Case No. 86 of 2015 of Jogigopa Police Station, District Bongaigoan, Assam and the investigation is pending therein. The petitioner has also alleged that yet another person, Shri Mohir Uddin of Village Koreya has also filed an FIR against the respondent No. 2 for similar nature offences that has been registered as Case No. 92 of 2015 at the same Police Station, Jogigopa. The petitioner has further stated that he has filed a civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Bongaigaon, being Title Suit No. 21 of 2015, seeking specific performance of the contract and has also filed an application seeking temporary injunction against transfer of the vehicles to any other person and therein, the Civil Judge, Bongaigaon has granted interim injunction on 13.07.2015, restraining the respondent No. 2 from transferring the vehicles to anyone else.

With reference to the aforesaid facts, the petitioner has questioned the two FIRs lodged by the respondent No. 2 with the submission that he has not committed any offence and was unnecessarily arrested in relation to these FIRs. It is also submitted that the Civil suit for specific performance of contract was pending and sufficient documents have also been furnished to the Investigating Officers to establish the legitimate claim of the petitioner over the vehicles in question; and there is no question of any criminality of conduct on the part of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the FIRs in question have been lodged by the respondent No. 2 only to grab the property sold to the petitioner and to evade the civil and criminal liabilities. The petitioner also submits that he has already incurred a huge amount of Rs. 70,00,000/- (Rupees seventy lakhs) on the basis of agreements executed by respondent No. 2, but the Investigating Officers concerned, without going through the material facts, were seeking to proceed further in the matter. It is submitted that the FIRs lodged by the respondent No. 2 deserve to be quashed as they carry false and factitious case with concealment of material facts.

It is noticed that in this petition, this Court ordered issuance of notice to the private respondent on 12.08.2015 and then, on 24.09.2015, the learned Government Advocate was granted time to call for the Case Diary but thereafter, the matter has only been adjourned. Lastly, on 13.04.2016, the matter was ordered to be listed today and the Investigating Officers was also expected to remain present. The Government Advocate submits that the Investigating Officers dealing with the investigation in the FIRs aforesaid are present in the Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that it is evident on a bare look at the background aspects that the FIRs in question are based on false and concocted stories; and there had been agreements executed by the respondent No. 2, though the same are sought to be denied; and even the civil litigation concerning the agreements in question is pending. On being queried about the status of the trucks concerned, it had been frankly pointed out that all the trucks involved in the two FIRs have been ordered to be given in custody of respondent No. 2 as the registered owner, and he has taken over the custody after filing the necessary Zimma in the Court concerned. It is also pointed out that the present petitioner has since been released on bail in both the FIRs.

So far as the present petition is concerned, without any comment on the merits of the case either way, suffice it to observe that the FIRs in question cannot be taken up for quashing only on the basis of the version of the petitioner/accused. The matter is pending in the investigation and admittedly, the documents sought to be referred by the petitioner have been supplied to the Investigating Officers. Obviously, the Investigating Officers are supposed to deal with the matter in accordance with law and to carry out every such enquiry/investigation that may be necessary for reaching to an appropriate conclusion; and to file specific reports of the result of investigation in the Court concerned.

The FIRs in question proceed on the allegations of detaining of the running trucks on the highway and then, stealing of the empty trucks. The veracity of the allegations and also the liability, if any, shall all be the matters for appropriate dealing and examination by the Investigating Officers concerned, but at the given stage and juncture, it cannot be said that the FIRs do not make out any case whatsoever, so as to be quashed altogether.

Subject to the observations foregoing, this criminal petition is required to be, and is, hereby dismissed but while making it clear that this Court has not pronounced on the merits of the case either way and it shall be expected of the Investigating Officers to conclude the investigation and to file the report/result in the Courts concerned at the earliest, preferably within 30 (thirty) days from today.