Jharkhand High Court
Dharambir Singh @ Dharamveer Singh S/O ... vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 12 January, 2024
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(Cr.) No. 732 of 2023
----
Dharambir Singh @ Dharamveer Singh S/o Sardar Singh, working
for gain as Branch Manager, Tata Motors Finance Limited, now
known as Tata Motors Finance Solutions Limited, PO PS
Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad.
... Petitioner
-versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary of Home,
Department of Home, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.
2. The Director General of Police, Police Bhawan, Dhurwa,
Ranchi.
3. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh
4. The Officer-in-Charge, Vishnugarh, Dist. Hazaribagh.
5. Mahesh Lilo Gope S/o Late Lilo Balchand Gope, R/o Village
Alpito, PO PS Vishnugarh, Dist. Hazaribagh 825312.
... Respondents
----
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Deepankar, AC to GA III
Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Advocate
----
5/ 12.01.2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the
State-respondents and learned counsel for the informant-respondent No.5.
2. Petitioner, in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of
the First Information Report in Vishnugarh Police Station Case No.179 of 2023
registered for offences under Sections 386, 406, 417, 420, 120B, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no
ingredients of any of the offences, either under the Indian Penal Code or any
other penal provisions, thus, in view of several judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, continuance of the criminal proceeding against the
petitioner is an abuse of the process of law and thus, liable to be quashed.
4. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the ingredients of
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out, inasmuch as, as per the
agreement it was understood that the entire dues will be paid by the accused
No.1, which he failed. The vehicle was sold to accused No.1 in presence of
accused No.2 on introduction of accused No.3 and accused No.4 being the
Branch Manager of Tata Motor Finance Ltd. On their assurance, vehicle was
sold to accused No.1 by the informant with the understanding that he will
liquidate the dues of the informant. Accused No.1 had, admittedly, not
liquidated the dues, thus, committed offence punishable under Section 420 of
the Indian Penal Code as the same amounts to cheating.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submitted that so far as this
petitioner is concerned, no offence is made out. After the complaint was sent
under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, investigation
proceeded and no material showing any offence as against the petitioner has
come to fore. This fact has been recorded in paragraph 9 of the counter
affidavit. It is necessary to quote paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit, which
reads as under: -
"9. That it will be worth submitting here that on the basis of
evidences collected during course of investigation, case
has been found 'lack of evidence' against present petitioner
(para 21 of CD), however report of investigation is yet to be
submitted.
6. After going through the entire record, I find that since no criminal
offence has been made out inasmuch as no material has been found as
against the petitioner during investigation, the First Information Report being
Vishnugarh Police Station Case No.179 of 2023 registered for offences under
Sections 386, 406, 417, 420, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, so far as this
petitioner is concerned, is hereby quashed.
7. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. Pending interlocutory
applications, if any, stands allowed.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03
