Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sudesh @ Swadesh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 January, 2020
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 MCRC-41986-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-41986-2019
(SUDESH @ SWADESH RAJPUT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 08-01-2020
Shri R.P. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri S. R.Kushwaha, learned P.L. for the respondent.
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the registration of FIR in POR No. 37362/02 dated 05.01.2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 2, 9, 39, 40, 40- A, 50, 51 and 52 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.
According to case, on 5.1.2019, on the basis of information receipt from an informant, officials of Forest Department Seoni made a search in the house of co-accused Samim @ shanu and found him making food of black buck's flesh. Thereafter, the officials has seized the raw and cooked flesh as well as one rifle from the possession of co-accused. The authority has registered the FIR against the co-accused on 05.01.2019 and recorded the statement of co-accused Samim. On his statements, the co-accused Samim stated that on 05.01.2019 when he was going by his motor cycle with co-
accused Tahir Khan, on the way, in the farm of present petitioner, they saw herd of black bucks then co-accused Tahir Khan made fire on the black bucks by which one black buck was fallen down. They came house by taking flesh of black bucks.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct evidence against the petitioner which shows that the petitioner is involved in offence in any manner. The petitioner is innocent person and has falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity. He submits that the petitioner was neither present at the time of incident nor participated in this offence in any manner. The only allegation against the petitioner is that the co-accused persons have hunted the black buck in his farm. Therefore, the forest department committed grave error in registering the FIR. With the aforesaid 2 MCRC-41986-2019 he prays for allowing of this petition.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the same and submits that the petitioner did not cooperate in investigation even after giving several opportunities. The petitioner is absconding since begning and there is probability of his involvement in crime. It is also argued by the State counsel that without interrogating the petitioner, the true facts of the case cannot be summarized. The hunting of black bucks may not be possible by a single person and an information is also having to the officials that a four wheeler was also used in crime whereas the co-accused is telling lie by showing the same as two wheeler. The above said facts and many other suspicions are remained to be investigated and without interrogating the petitioner, it would be impossible for the authority to make fair investigation in the case. Apart from that if the petitioner is exonerated by allowing this petition, it would affect the society as well as wild life in adverse manner. With the aforesaid, he prays for dismissal of this petition.
Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.
On perusal of case diary, it appears that the flesh of black buck was seized from the possession of co-accused Samim @ Shanu and on the basis of his statement, the authority has implicated the present petitioner and other co-accused in the case. It appears from the case diary that the co-accused Samim has stated his statement that on 05-01-2019, he hunted the black buck with the help of co-accused-Tahir Khan. According to Samim @ Shanu, when he was going by his motor bike with his friend co-accused Tahir, they saw the herd of black buck in the farm of present petitioner thereafter co- accused Tahir made fire on black bucks by which one black buck was died and they took its flesh for making food. The only allegation which found in the case diary against the present petitioner is that place wherein the black buck was hunted, belongs to present petitioner. A crusher machine of the petitioner is also established nearby the incident place. But on perusal of panchnama annexed in the case diary, it appears that the present petitioner has 3 MCRC-41986-2019 refused to cooperate in the investigation of forest department which creates clouds of doubt over his innocence. Since the petitioner is not co-operating the authority, the investigation is still incomplete. In the case of State of Tamilnadu Vs. S. Martin and others reported in (2018) 5 SCC 718, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that quashment of proceeding when the investigation is yet to completed, is incorrect and uncalled for.
Therefore, at this stage, when the investigation is still incomplete, this is not a fit case to quash the proceeding in POR No. 37362/02 dated 05.01.2019 by exercising the inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this petition is hereby dismissed.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE L.R. Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2020.01.17 13:25:54 +05'30'