SATISH MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Misc. No. 25057 of 2004 has been filed by one Satish Mishra, the Proprietor of M/s. Bokaro Carrying Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") and the employees of the said Company who are facing prosecution under Ss. 420, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 49 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2004. In Cr. Misc. No. 25052 of 2004 the said Satish Mishra, Proprietor of M/s. Bokaro Carrying Corporation is sought to be prosecuted under Ss. 420, 468, 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 49 of the Act, in connection with Alamganj P.S. case No. 58 of 2004. Since both the cases relate to the same petitioner and are in connection with his business they have been heard together with the consent of the parties and is being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Alamganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2004 was registered on the basis of a written report submitted by one Jit Narain Prasad, Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Headquarter (Investigation) who alleged that he raided the premises of the Company at Chhoti Pahari on 28.2.2004 and detected that the goods carried by the Company having been brought by the Company from outside the State were not accompanied with bill/chalan and other relevant documents and was with the intention to evade tax by the petitioner herein which was in violation of Sec. 31(2)(b) read with Sec. 33(5) of the Act. Accordingly the said goods were seized. On the basis of the said written report Alamganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2004 was registered and cognizance was taken by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna city on 31.3.2004.

(3.) In Alamganj P.S. Case No. 58 of 2004 the said case was registered on the basis of the written report submitted by one Krishna Singh, Assistant Commissioner, Headquarter (Investigation) who is alleged to have raided the godown premises of petitioner, Satish Mishra, on 28.2.2004 and in course thereof certain goods were seized u/s. 33(5) of the Act which allegedly had come from outside the State without relevant documents and was with the intention to evade tax. It was also alleged that M/s. Relaxo Co. was transporting goods through the petitioner's Carrier without document with the intention to evade tax and as such there is violation of Sec. 31(2)(b) read with Sec. 33(5) of the Act.