LAWS(JHAR)-2007-3-29

DINESH RAI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On March 30, 2007
DINESH RAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings pending against him in Excise Case No. 65 of 2005 including the order dated 14.11.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi whereby the learned court below has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 47(A) of the Excise Act. The basic ground on which the instant application has been filed, is that the impugned order of cognizance is against the provision of Section 96 of the (Bihar) Excise Act, 1915, since the prosecution report has been filed beyond the period of six months from the date of the alleged offence.

(2.) FACTS of the case briefly stated is that in the night of 30.6.2005 a raid was conducted at the house of the petitioner by the officials of the Excise Department and in course of search, certain quantities of packets of illicit liquor were found and the same were seized. The petitioner had allegedly managed to escape from the back door of his house. The prosecution report in respect of the aforesaid offence, though dated 5.12.2005, was placed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 14.11.2006 and on the same day, the leaned court below proceeded to take cognizance of the offence under Section 47(A) of the Excise Act against the petitioner, issuing summons against him and directing him to face trial.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the State concedes that the prosecution report was submitted much beyond the period of six months from the date of offence, but argues that Section 96 of the Act does not prohibit taking of cognizance beyond the period of six months and, therefore, even if the prosecution report was filed beyond the period of six months from the date of offence, the order of cognizance cannot be challenged on the ground that the order was not passed Within the period of six months from the date of offence.