Md. Abdul Barkat Alam vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 10.03.2023 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No.66 of 2020 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 511 of 2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under sections 413, 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, section 33 of Indian Forest Act and section 30(ii) of Coal Mines Act on the basis of the charge sheet submitted by the police against the petitioner for having committed the said offences.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the owner of the tractor bearing No. JH 08 E 9012, in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused persons was involved in habitually dealing with the stolen coal by extracting coal from the protected forest area and also in assisting in concealment of the said stolen coal. After investigation of the case, police found the allegation against the petitioner to be true and submitted charge sheet against him and on the basis of the charge-sheet, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner as stated above.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the seized vehicle. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed.

Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State submits that the only contentions of the petitioner is that the allegation against him are false and that plea he can certainly take such plea during the investigation of the case and in case charge-sheet is submitted against him and charges are framed against him then; also during the trial of the case; but the same is not a sufficient ground to quash the entire criminal proceedings at this nascent stage. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Others reported in 2004 2 Supreme 501 that the defence of an accused person of the case and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused cannot be considered in exercise of the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the High Court.

It is also a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Another vs. Akhil Sharda & Others reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 820 that no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure the relevant portion of which reads as under:-

"Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering." (Emphasis supplied)

Coming to the facts of this case, the only contention of the petitioner is that the allegation against the petitioner is false. The only contention of the petitioner for quashing is at best a defence which the petitioner can take during the trial of the case; but the same is not a sufficient ground to quash the entire criminal proceedings at this nascent stage.

Because of the discussions made above this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to accede to the prayers made in the Cr.M.P. in exercise of its power under section 528 of the BNSS, 2023.

Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed.