JITENDRA SAH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 03.12.2012, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda in connection with Pathargama P.S. Case No. 149 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1328 of 2012 instituted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the aforesaid Pathargama P.S. Case No. 149 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1328 of 2012.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that an FIR was instituted on the basis of written information given by one Anchal Kumar Pandey, Block Supply Officer, Pathargama, District -Godda, in which it has been disclosed that petitioner was carrying about 45 litres of blue kerosene oil in his motorcycle and when he reached near the house of Sahdeo Hembram of village Logain, he was asked to stop by the said Sahdeo Hembram and thereafter, it was disclosed by the petitioner that it was purchased from the fair price shop of Jyotin Mehra of Logain village. Later on, the said kerosene oil was seized by the informant -Block Supply Officer in presence of police and District Supply Officer and two independent witnesses and a seizure list was duly prepared.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, allegations are false and frivolous and the petitioner has been wrongly roped in this case due to previous enmity. It is also submitted that petitioneraccused was granted regular bail from the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Godda in B.P. No. 640 of 2012 vide order dated 19.10.2012. It is further submitted that grandfather of the petitioner Kaleshwar Prasad Sah died on 13.09.2012 and his Shradh ceremony was to be held on 24.09.2012 and 25.09.2012 and therefore seized 45 litres of kerosene oil was purchased for the purpose of use in the Shradh ceremony of his grandfather. It is also submitted that the witnesses as examined during course of investigation have also supported the aforesaid contention of the petitioner in their statement before the police under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.