LOCHON SAHU ALIAS SHIOLOCHAN SHAU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceeding being C R 198/95 pending before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siliguri, which arose out of RPF Post Siliguri Junction Case No. 2(9)/95 under section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, dated 16.9.95.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this revisional application may be summarized as follows :- RPF Post Siliguri Junction case No. 2(9)/95 dated 16.9.95 under section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, (hereinafter referred to as the [R.P. (U.P.) Act] was started on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Dilip Roy with the Officer-in-Charge of the said RPF Post, inter alia, alleging that on 16.9.95 at about 8.30 hrs. acting on a secret information the defacto complainant and his force were in ambush near railway over-bridge of Siliguri Junction and found one cycle ricksaw near railway market, Siliguri. It was alleged that two person were in that cycle ricksaw and on suspicion they were intercepted and the person who was sitting on the ricksaw tried to flee away, but both of them were nabbed and on search 10 Nos. of railway ACEP were allegedly found concealed in the space under ricksaw seat-cover and on interrogation those person disclosed their names as Raju Rai of Panchanan Colony and Somnath Biswas of Patti Colony, Siliguri. They could not, however, give any satisfactory explanation. Nor they could produce any valid documents in support of possession of such articles and on further enquiry those nabbed persons disclosed that they had procured those materials from railway premises of Siliguri Junction and they were going to dispose of the same to one Mani Biswas of Siliguri and the present petitioner. They however, further disclosed that previously also railway materials were disposed of by them to the present petitioner and said Mani Biswas. Thereafter, those articles were seized and those nabbed persons were arrested.

(3.) It has further been alleged that on 16.9.95 at about 12.30 hrs. some police personnel came to the shop cum godown of the present petitioner during his absence and in presence of his employees they made a search of the godown without having any search warrant from the concerned Court and at that time, they seized certain articles therefrom and on query, it was disclosed that those articles were seized in connection with the aforesaid case.