RAJIV KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged the order dated 8.6.1999, refusing to discharge the Petitioner for the offences under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. A First Information Report has been instituted by the Railway Protection Force alleging therein that the Petitioner and his associates were supplying sub-standard coal at Jamalpur to the railways. On suspicion the truck of the Petitioner was stopped by the Railway Protection Force and they came to the conclusion that instead of providing coal, the Petitioner was providing coal dust.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner relies on an agreement between the railways and the Petitioner with respect to supply of coal. Specifically he relies on Clause 3.0(i) and Clause 5.0, Sub-clause A(ii) which reads as follows:

(3.) 0. Inspection.-(i) The supplier at their own cost will arrange inspection and tenting of hardcoke before dispatch by any one organization among the following authorities: