CHIRANJEEV LAL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) PETITIONERS in this writ application have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding, initiated against him, in connection with Ranchi Sadar Kotwali (Sukhdeo Nagar) P.S. Case No. 564 of 2003, corresponding to G.R. No. 3119 of 2003, as also the order dated 8th January, 2004, whereby cognizance of the offences under Sections 414 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners and other co -accused.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submitted that this petitioners and others have been falsely implicated in this case as there is neither evidence, except suspicion, nor any report has been lodged regarding commission of theft of the vehicle. He further submits that in absence of reporting a case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, no offence under Section 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioners and others. It is also submitted that the genuine registered owner of the vehicle has filed a compromise petition in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, as contained in An -nexure -2 to this writ petition, mentioning therein that the seized truck was lying in the garage in question within his knowledge and on his direction it was lying in the garage. He has no grievance against these petitioners and others regarding commission of theft of his truck. The learned counsel further submitted that on that very basis all the accused persons have been enlarged on bail, as the owner of the truck has not lodged any information against these petitioners and others. On the other hand, without verifying or enquiring into the matter, the S.I., who is Officer -in -Charge of Sukhdeo Nagar Police Station, on his self -recorded statement has lodged the instant First Information Report.