Allahabad High Court
Sajjan Gupta And 2 Others vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 5 July, 2022
Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8523 of 2022 Petitioner :- Sajjan Gupta And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachin Mishra,Bala Nath Mishra,Ram Vishal Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Syed Waiz Mian,J.
This petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 03.09.2021, registered as Case Crime No. 722 of 2021, under Sections- 420, 409 I.P.C. and 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, Police Station-Tilhar, District-Shahjahanpur, on the ground that the petitioners are merely millers and as per policy it's obligation was limited to hulling the paddy supplied by the State authorities. Argument is that after hulling the paddy, rice had to be transported by the concerned transporter, which was the entire responsibility of the department and therefore, the petitioner cannot be made liable for any alleged losses in the transportation of rice.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that whether the shortage is due to loss causes during the course of transportation or is only on account of short supply of rice by the petitioners can only be ascertained at the stage of investigation. The allegations are specifically on the part of the petitioners hence, no interference in the matter be made.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record.
Petitioners' contention that losses in supply of rice is attributed to short fall made during transportation is an aspect which is yet to be examined and determined during the course of investigation. The FIR otherwise makes specific allegations against the petitioners of short supply of rice. The criminality part of the transaction having been alleged in the First Information Report requires appropriate investigation so as to find out the truth. Such factual inquiry would not be warranted in the present petition, at this stage. It otherwise appears from the record that the petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 24780 of 2021, in which the following order was passed on 21.10.2021:
"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner claims that the liability of Rs. 2,62,32,515/- has been wrongly fixed and that it has not violated the law. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner did not account for the paddy supplied to it for conversion to rice for public distribution.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that some time may be granted to the petitioner to make good the entire amount of Rs. 2,62,32,515/-.
4. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner deposits the entire amount of Rs. 2,62,32,515/- by 31 December 2021, such that it deposits an amount of rupees one crore by 30 November 2021, no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner.
5. In case of default of any of the conditions as mentioned above, the present order shall stand automatically vacated and recovery proceedings shall revive from that stage. "
It is admitted that the conditions specified in the aforesaid order have not been satisfied and the entire amount has not been deposited. Therefore, the petitioners have also applied for anticipatory bail, in which it is alleged that an interim protection has been granted to the petitioners. Whether order passed in anticipatory bail application has been extended or not, as prayed, is an aspect to be examined by the Court concerned and requires no observation from this Court. Since, prima-facie, allegations with regard to commissioning of cognizable offence is disclosed in the present petition, therefore, the prayer made to quash the impugned FIR is declined.
Accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.7.2022 Deepak/