Gauhati High Court
Manoj Kumar Jain vs The State Of Assam on 4 September, 2020
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010111902020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
AB 2243/2020
1:MANOJ KUMAR JAIN
S/O LATE DEEPCHAND JAIN
R/O CHAULKHOWA
P.O.-LOHOAL
P.S.-DIBRUGARH
DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
PIN-786010
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SISHIR DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP
ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 04-09-2020 Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. T.K. Misra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent, State of Assam.
2) By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) the petitioner viz. Manoj Kumar Jain has prayed for pre-arrest bail, in connection with Chabua Page No.# 2/3 Police Station Case no. 139/2020 registered under Sections 379/411, Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 23(1)(a) of Petroleum Act, 1934 read with Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
3) The First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged by a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Chabua Police Station on 23.07.2020. In the FIR, it is mentioned that on 23.07.2020, upon receipt of an information, a team led by Additional Superintendent of Police (Headquarter), Dibrugarh conducted a raid in R.D. Dhaba Kanjikhuwa under Chabua Police Station and seized i) 3 (three) numbers of tankers containing approximately 20,000 liters of suspected adulterated diesel/condensate, ii) 1,000 litres of kerosene used as adulterant, iii) 5 litres Nitric acid, iv) 20 kgs of suspected powder adulterant, v) 2 Nos. of Electric Motors, vi) 2 Nos. Motorcycles, vii) 1 scooty, viii) 1 chemical testing kit, ix) 2 Nos. of sintex approximately 1,000 litres kerosene plastic drum, x) 7 Nos. of empty drums, xi) 3 Nos. of plastic pipes. One Sri Amit Urang was apprehended. Suspecting the materials to be used for adulteration of diesel the FIR has been lodged. Suspicion is also made that the diesel/condensate were stolen and siphoned off from Oil India Limited Tankers and IOCL Tankers and the seized kerosene was suspected to be siphoned off from P.D.S./Co-operative societies.
4) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary.
5) It is contended that as Section 23(1)(a) of Petroleum Act, 1934 is punishable with simple imprisonment which may extend to one month, or with fine, or with both, the same is bailable in nature. It is similarly contended that Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is also bailable in nature. In so far as the allegation regarding the offences under Sections 379/411, IPC it is submitted that none has made any allegation regarding theft of the suspected adulterated diesel amounting to about 20,000 litres and other materials seized. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that it is suspected that the business of adulteration of petroleum products is being carried out and after such adulteration, the adulterated petroleum products are suspected to be sold in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. On query, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that during the course of investigation carried out so far, no complaint has been received from any quarter including Oil India Ltd. or IOC Ltd. that any petroleum products from their ends had been stolen.
6) The apprehension of the petitioner of arrest has stemmed from the fact that his employer Sri Vikash Jain was arrested and subsequently, released on 27.08.2020 in connection with the case and, thus, he apprehends that he might be arrested in connection with the case though he contends that he has no connection with the act of adulteration of petroleum products.
7) On being asked, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that from the materials available in the case diary, collected during the course of investigation carried out so far, nothing has been unearthed so as to connect the petitioner in connection with the offences alleged in the FIR. He has, therefore, not objected to the prayer made in this application, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall have to cooperate with the investigation by appearing before the I.O. of the case as and when his presence is required Page No.# 3/3 for the sake of investigation.
8) In view of the above projections made by the learned counsel for the parties, noted above, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of benefit of pre-arrest bail under Section 438, CrPC, provided he extends his co-operation and assistance in carrying out further investigation of the case and his release on pre-arrest bail, at this stage of investigation, is not likely to hamper the cause of investigation in any prejudicial manner.
9) Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner viz. Manoj Kumar Jain in connection with Chabua Police Station Case no. 139/2020, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority subject to the conditions that :
i) the petitioner shall appear before the I.O. of the case within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from today and shall thereafter, appear before the I.O. as and when called for the further investigation of the case;
ii) the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
iii) the petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
iv) the petitioner shall maintain law and order and he shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or of the commission of which he is suspected; and
v) the petitioner shall regularly remain present during the trial and co- operate the Court to complete the trial for the above offences, if charge sheeted in the case.
The application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Return the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant