LAWS(JHAR)-2011-5-13

MAHABIR PRASAD RUNGTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On May 16, 2011
MAHABIR PRASAD RUNGTA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the entire criminal proceedings against him, arising out of Gidi P.S. Case No. 48/2006, including the order dated 10.6.2010 by which cognizance of the offence was taken under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act.

(2.) Prosecution story in short was that on tip off, the police party raided the Ramgarh Sponge Iron (P) Ltd., Hosir in the night of 7.7.2006 and seized 160 bags of coal being carried on equal number of bicycles. Total weight of the coal carried in the bags were assessed about 10 tonnes. 160 bicycles with 160 coal bags, were seized and were made over to the custody of the security guard present at the gate of the Ramgarh Sponge Iron (P) Ltd. against preparation of undertaking after preparation of the seizure list in presence of the independent witnesses. On the self statement of the informant police officer, Gidi P.S. Case No. 48/2006 was instituted against the Occupier and the Manager of Factory as also against 160 unknown culprits who carried coal bags on cycles. Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the Petitioner Mahabir Prasad Rungta and another Mahabir Prasad Ritolia for the alleged offence under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act as also under Section 30 (iii) of the Coal Mines Act. The learned CJM after perusal of the materials on the record, took cognizance of the offence only under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act against the accused. In the charge-sheet, it was stated by the Investigating Office that the Petitioner was the owner of Ramgarh Sponge Iron (P) Ltd., Hosir and this official address was also mentioned as 107, Pragati Tower, 26-Rajendra Place, New Delhi. As regards other unknown 160 accused persons in the FIR, it was explained in the charge-sheet that no clue could be found against any of them.

(3.) Learned Counsel Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai submitted that the charge-sheet was submitted against the Petitioner treating him as the occupier/owner of the Ramgarh Sponge Iron (P) Ltd. Admittedly, the factory was run by a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, as such, Ramgarh Sponge Iron (P) Ltd. was having a separate juristic entity, which owns the factory as a person capable of owning property, as such, the Petitioner could not be held as the owner.