SAKUL HAMID Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard finally, with the consent of the parties.

(2.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the charge-sheet filed against the petitioners under Sec. 420, 467 and 468 of IPC and Sec. 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915, in Crime No.251/2019 registered at Police Station Nangalwadi, District- Barwani. A prayer is also made to quash the subsequent proceedings emanating from the aforesaid charge-sheet in S.T. No.25/2020, pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Barwani.

(3.) In brief, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner No.1/Sakul Hamid is the driver of the vehicle, whereas petitioner No. 2/Ramesh Pullamar is the co-driver, both of whom were apprehended on 2/11/2019, while they were found to be transporting 1541 boxes of liquor, in all, 13,869 bulk litres, in a truck bearing registration No.TN-52-F-4294. It is alleged in the charge-sheet that the petitioners were transporting the aforesaid liquor without proper license and the petitioners were also not able to inform as to who had loaded the liquor in the vehicle and the permit which they were carrying mentioned 1600 cases of liquor, whereas the total number of liquor boxes/cases found in the truck were 1541. During the course of investigation it has also been found that the petitioners did not get the documents stamped on each of the check-posts falling on their route, as it is alleged that they were supposed to travel from Chandigarh to Kerala. Thus, it is alleged that the petitioners have committed the forgery by transporting the liquor illegally and that too with the quantity which was less than the quantity mentioned in the Permit. It is also mentioned in the charge-sheet that from the aforesaid infirmities found in the documents available with the petitioners, lead to only conclusion that they intend to transport the liquor on the same Permit for more than one occasions and since the liquor cases were less than the cases mentioned in the Permit, it has been concluded that the transportation of liquor was different than the one which was mentioned in the Permit and other documents, hence, Sec. 467, 468 and 420 of IPC have also been added. The charge-sheet has been kept open under Sec. 173(8) of Cr.P.C. against the owner of the vehicle Swami S. Krishnamurthy.