RAJ KUMAR DHUPAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is shown as Accused No.4 in Crime No.24/2014 (Special C.C.No.53/2016).

(2.) The allegations against the petitioner are that the petitioner was working as a consultant in M/s. Yazdani International Private Limited during 2009-10. During this period, he was responsible for the transactions relating to iron ore on behalf of the Company, as per the terms of the agreement and also on the basis of other documents and statements of the witnesses.

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is that, he is a commission agent. Even in the charge sheet, he is described as a commission agent of M/s. Yazdani International Pvt.Ltd. The FIR was directed to be registered only against the exporters and those persons involved in the transportation of iron ore. The petitioner was neither an exporter nor was he involved in the transportation of the alleged iron ore and therefore the prosecution of the petitioner on the alleged charges is patently illegal. Further he contends that the name of the petitioner did not figure in the initial FIR registered by the respondent - Lokayuktha Police. Even though 776 documents were seized during the course of investigation, none of the documents refer to the petitioner. Among the 118 witnesses examined by the prosecution, none of the witnesses have implicated the petitioner and disclosed his involvement in either the export or transportation of iron ore. As he was working as a commission agent at the relevant time, there is absolutely no material much less incriminating material to prosecute the petitioner for the alleged offences.