NARENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed under Section 482, Cr. PC, challenging the order passed by Sessions Judge, Badwani in Cr. R. No. 37/05 on dated 1-9-2005, whereby and wherein the order passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajpur in Cr. Case No. 358/2004 on dated 21-6-2005 framing charge against the present petitioner under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, has been confirmed.

(2.) SHORT facts of the case, which are necessary for the disposal of the present petition are that police Rajpur seized 6,000 liters of liquor from Truck No. MP 09-K-5637 on 2-2-2004 and registered an offence punishable under Sections 34 (A) and 49 (2) of the M. P. Excise Act against other co-accused persons. The matter was investigated by the police, during investigation it was found that the documents which were found in that vehicle were forged one particularly the permit issued by Road Transport Officer (RTO), Indore. The original registered owner of the truck was one Mohar Singh and that registered owner submitted an application for transferring that vehicle in the name of Bhupendra Singh alongwith certain documents in the office of RTO, Indore. As per case of the prosecution though Bhupendra Singh was not the registered owner of the vehicle even then present applicant issued a temporary permit in his name, after entering into a criminal conspiracy with other co-accused persons to transport illicit liquor in that vehicle.

(3.) IT has been stated in the petition filed by the petitioner that petitioner is a public servant, who works in the office of RTO, Indore as Asstt. Grade II. In that capacity when application for issuance of temporary permit was received then the same was processed by the present petitioner and proposals were submitted before RTO. It has also been stated that earlier application for transferring the name of registered owner of the vehicle was also moved by Bhupendra Singh with the consent of original registered owner Mohar Singh. Some documents were filed and vehicle was also physically verified by concerning Transport Sub Inspector, who gave certificate, but as the fitness certificate was not available, so at that time vehicle could not be transferred in the name of Bhupendra Singh. Later on when Bhupendra Singh applied for temporary permit then at that time he also submitted fitness certificate, and, therefore, as all formalities were completed thereafter, proposals for issuance of temporary permit were moved by the present applicant. He has committed no mistake and simply worked as per the rules and procedure of the office of RTO. It has also been stated in the petition that if at all any offence has been committed by present applicant then same has been committed at Indore and not at Rajpur. It has further been stated that petitioner is a public servant and no sanction has been obtained from any Competent Authority under the provisions of Section 197 of the Cr. PC for his prosecution, and, therefore, the prosecution is bad in law and is liable to be quashed.