PUSHKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application moved under Section 438, Cr. P.C. by the accused - petitioner Puskhar Singh with the averments that the case under Sections 304, 286 & 427, I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 5, Explosive Substances Act, 1988 has been registered against him by the police of P.S. Mangulpeer (Dist. Akola) (Maharashtra), intimation regarding the case has been sen by it to the S.H.O., Mandal (Bhilwara) and he has apprehension that he might be arrested in connection with the said case.

(2.) Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner contends that the accused-petitioner is a partner of the firm which has been granted licence under the Explosive Act by the concerned authority and supplies explosive substances for digging of walls. He also contends that no offence under Section 304, I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 5. Explosive Substances Act, 1908 is made out against him. He lastly contends hat the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara has seriously erred to rely upon Sayad Zafrul Hussain & Others v. State, 1986 Cr. L.J. 605 (patna) and to ignore various decisions of this Court, cited in his order dated May 17, 1994 rejecting the petition moved under Section 438, Cr.P.C. He places reliance upon Capt. Satish Kumar Sharma v. Delhi Administration, Dr. N.R. Nayadu v. State of Karnataka, Pradeep Kumarv. State of Rajasthan, Madan Mohan v. State of Bihar, Jagdish Prasad v. State of Rajasthan, T. Madhusudan v. Superintendent of Police, B.R. Sinha v. State. Heera Bhai v. State of Rajasthan, and Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab.

(3.) In reply, it is contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that the said offences have been committed in Maharashtra and the F.I.R. has been registered against the accused-petitioner by the police of P.S. Mangulpeer (Akola, Maharashtra) and as such this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition moved under Section 438, Cr. P.C. He places reliance upon 1986 Cr. L.J. 605 (supra).