PREM CHAND GRAG Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is directed against the order dated 11.02.2014 taking cognizance and issuing process against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 120B read with Sections 409 and 420 IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(C) and (D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) THE facts reveal that Section Forester, Ankola visited Belekeri Port on 15.03.2010 and found huge quantity of iron ore stacked inside the port. He drawn the panchanama regarding the proceedings of his visit and registered the forest offence in Cr. No. 17/2009 -10 for the offence punishable under Sections 2(7)(b)(iv), 62 and 80 of Karnataka Forest Act, 1863 and the Rules there under as no valid permit for transportation of the iron ore stored therein was found. The FIR was submitted to the JMFC Court.

(3.) IT is the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner that the facts and evidence collected during the investigation does not disclose the ingredients of offences. He submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and mechanical and the valuable rights of petitioner have not been taken into consideration and prima facie, no offence is made out against him for which the cognizance is taken by the learned Trial Court. He submits that if the material placed on record in the investigation is taken into consideration except the fact that accused No. 2. sold the seized iron ore to accused No. 5 and that the petitioner had the knowledge of seizure, there is no other material to take cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the petitioner. He submits that the material placed on record is insufficient to take cognizance and there are no such facts which would constitute any of the offences aforesaid. He submits that the learned Trial Judge has not applied his mind and mechanically stated that perusal of the report reveals the facts which are sufficient to take the cognizance. Therefore, he submits that the impugned order has to be quashed.