Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Trikam vs State on 13 January, 2017
Author: Vijay Bishnoi
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B.Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2514 / 2016
Trikam S/o Hadu Bhai Mata, resident of village Matawas. Ratnal,
Taluka Anja, District Kutch Bhuj, Gujarat
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.S. Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, P.P.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Order 13/01/2017 This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for quashing of FIR No.109/2013 of Police Station Mahajan, District Bikaner qua the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 19/54 and 54(A) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. (for short 'the Act of 1950'). The petitioner has also prayed that proceedings in Criminal Case No. 245/2014 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Loonkaransar qua the petitioner be quashed.
Brief facts of the case are that the police has registered FIR No. 109/2013 at Police Station Mahajan District Bikaner against one Bhanwarlal s/o Gangaram for the offence punishable under Sections 19/54 and 54(A) of the Act of 1950, while alleging that Bhanwarlal was transporting illegal liquor in a truck and huge (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2514/2016] quantity of illegal liquor has also been recovered by the police. During the course of investigation the police found that the truck, in which accused Bhanwarlal was transporting illegal liquor, is registered in the name of the petitioner. As per the charge-sheet filed by the police, despite serious efforts, the petitioner could not be arrested and, thereafter, the police has filed charge-sheet against accused person Bhanwarlal for the offence punishable under Sections 19/54, 19/57 of the Act of 1950 and under Sections 420, 407, 408, 471 and 120-B of IPC. The police has filed charge-sheet against the petitioner under Section 54(A) of the Act of 1950 and under Sections 420, 407, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. As the accused Bhanwarlal was already arrested but the petitioner was not arrested, therefore, the charge-sheet against the petitioner was filed under Section 299 Cr.P.C. and trial against the petitioner is pending in the Court of ACJM, Loonkaransar.
At this stage, the petitioner has filed this criminal misc. petition with aforementioned prayers.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that as a matter of fact the petitioner has already sold the vehicle in which the co accused person Bhanwarlal was found transporting illegal liquor to him by way of agreement to sell and he has disclosed this fact to the police authorities by making a representation but they have not taken into consideration the said representation of the petitioner and illegally filed charge-sheet against him under Section 299 Cr.P.C. treating him as absconder. It is further argued that the petitioner has filed a complaint against the accused Bhanwarlal under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC in State of Gujarat (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2514/2016] and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhuj took cognizance against accused Bhanwarlal for the said offences. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the reliefs prayed for in this criminal misc. petition be granted.
This petition was presented by the petitioner before this Court on 02.09.2016 and the office has pointed out as many as two defects on 08.09.2016, however, the said defects have not been removed. Otherwise also, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. this Court cannot look into the defence of an accused person against whom trial is pending before the competent court. If the petitioner is having any defence, he may appear before the trial court and join the trial. If any defence is produced by the petitioner before the trial court, it is expected that the trial court would consider the same in accordance with law.
With these observations, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed for non removal of defects as well as on merits.
Stay petition also stands dismissed.
(VIJAY BISHNOI)J. Taruna