DIPTIRANJAN PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners by way of this application U/S. 482 Cr.P.C. pray to quash the following:-

(2.) Prosecution case in brief was, in the course of inspection of railway sidings at Jaroli on 23/1/2010, around 63 rakes of iron ore were found to have dispatched to different places through Rail from 1/1/2010 to 23/1/2010, but the consigner and consignee of such transaction of iron ore were neither lessee nor licensee of Joda circle. Hence, the above quantity of dispatched iron ore i.e. 63 rakes was suspected to have been procured by way of theft and transported with connivance of Railway employees/Authorities without permission.

(3.) In the course of argument, Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Sr. counsel has submitted that although FIR was lodged against the unknown persons, but the Petitioners have been charge-sheeted in this case without any prima facie materials. It is further submitted by the learned Sr. counsel for the Petitioners that the materials so far collected by the IO do not disclose the necessary ingredients of the offence U/Ss. 379/120-B of IPC and the implication of each of the Petitioners was on the basis of suspicion and imagination and, therefore, the criminal proceeding against the petitioners being an abuse of process of Court may kindly be quashed. On the other hand, learned ASC by taking this Court to the relief claimed by each of the petitioners, has submitted that in the course of investigation, the IO had collected prima facie materials against the petitioners and, thereby, the cognizance taken by the learned J.M.F.C., Barbil cannot be faulted with and, therefore, the CRLMCs being unmerited may kindly be dismissed. Further, this Court has also heard the parties on the issues of limitation to take cognizance of offences.