Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ravi Dutt vs State Of Haryana on 13 February, 2012

Author: Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia

Bench: Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

               Criminal Misc. No. M-37767 of 2011 (O&M)
                  Date of decision: 13th February, 2012

Ravi Dutt
                                                                 ... Petitioner
                                    Versus
State of Haryana
                                                              ... Respondent

CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:     Mr. Vimal Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Mr. Amandeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
             for the State.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in a case arising out of FIR No.316 dated 18.09.2011 registered at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala under Section 7/10/55 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Sections 420, 409 and 120-B IPC.

Counsel for the petitioner states that in spite of the best efforts made, he has not been able to procure the record prepared by the District Food and Supply Officer.

According to the counsel, the petitioner was awarded a contract of supplying wheat and rice to the Education Department, Haryana for preparation of mid-day meals. He further submits that when the food-grain supplied by the petitioner was weighed, there was a shortage of 7 kg of wheat however, stock of rice was in excess by 125 kg.

Criminal Misc. No.M-37767 of 2011 (O&M) 2

Counsel for the State submits that subsequently the entire consignment of wheat and rice supplied by the petitioner was weighed and a shortage of 468 kg wheat and 48 kg of rice was found. Thus, learned counsel submits that for shortage in supply of goods, the petitioner is to be prosecuted for an offence of misappropriation.

Admittedly, the petitioner is a contractor who was supplying food-grain as per the contract to the Education Department. It was incumbent upon the Department to weigh each and every bag at the time of delivery of food-grain and issue a receipt regarding the weighment. If there was any excess or shortage in the supply of wheat, it could always be adjusted in monetary terms. It is a moot question whether the petitioner has committed a criminal offence or his acts will constitute a civil liability.

Counsel for the State, on instructions from Satpal Singh, Inspector, Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala, submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation, however, he is required for less supply of food-grain.

This Court is amused by the argument raised by counsel for the State. If the food-grain is supplied less in quantity, it can always be adjusted later-on. Furthermore, for shortage in weighment of the food- grain supplied, the petitioner is being prosecuted. It will be determined during the course of trial as to whether there was any shortage in the supply of food-grain or not.

Taking into consideration totality of circumstances including nature of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail. Hence, the present petition is accepted. The order dated December 14, 2011 passed by a Coordinate Criminal Misc. No.M-37767 of 2011 (O&M) 3 Bench of this Court, granting interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, is hereby affirmed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting/investigating officer. However, he shall continue to appear before the investigating agency as and when called-for till filing of a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. He shall also abide by the conditions specified under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. On submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., the petitioner shall be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

However, any observation made in this order may not be construed as a final expression on the merits of the case.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 13, 2012 rps