Om Prakash Sharma vs The State of Jharkhand

D.K. Sinha, J.—The petitioner has preferred this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Chirkunda (Maithan) P.S. Case No. 194 of 2002 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3057 of 2002 as against implication of the petitioner for the offence u/s 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

The brief fact of the case is that a truck bearing registration number A.P.7W-3366 was intercepted by the Maithan Police on the secret information, carrying coal without valid permit. The driver of the truck was arrested on chase by the police and on the information collected from the said driver, In-charge of the Maithan Police out post sent a written report on the basis of which a case was instituted against the driver, owner of the said truck and others. The police after investigation submitted charge sheet against the driver pending investigation against the truck owner as well as owner of the coal as mentioned in the same paragraph of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer. The cognizance of the offence was taken u/s 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

A requisition was made by the Investigating Officer of the present case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad for issuance of arrest warrants against one Uma shankar Pandey and another Om Prakash Sharma, who is the petitioner in the present petition on the basis of the memo of evidence as contained in the said requisition. In column 4 of the memo of evidence a certified copy of which is on the record at page 18, it is mentioned that it was stated by the owner of the GLT Transport in course of investigation that the truck in question was taken away by the petitioner Om Prakash Sharma for loading coal thereon from the transport office.

Submission has been made on behalf of the petitioner that cognizance of the offence was taken on 28.1.2003 on the basis of the charge sheet submitted on 17.1.2003. But after lapse of eight months, the petitioner was made accused, though from the bare perusal of the written report, no offence was made out against him for want of reporting of the offence u/s 379 or 380, no case can be registered u/s 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and, therefore, the present case is the abuse of the process of the court.

From perusal of the materials on record as well as requisition of the police together with the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad dated 28.1.2003, 24.9.2003, 24.11.2003 there does not appear illegality therein. It is not always necessary that the offence reported u/s 414 of the Indian Penal Code must be preceded by an offence of reported theft in view of the fact that in Jharkhand where there are several abandoned coal mines of Coal India Limited and other Companies, carrying of coal without valid paper attracts an offence and hence, the order impugned whereby warrant of arrest has been directed to be issued against the petitioner and subsequently proclamation u/s 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in G.R.No. 3057 of 2002 do not call for any interference u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and hence this petition is rejected.