Sonu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7190 MP

                                                                           1
                                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                       AT INDORE
                                                                            BEFORE
                                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                                    ON THE 12th OF MAY, 2022

                                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9499 of 2020

                                                   Between:-
                                                   SONU S/O SHRI TEJSINGH JAISWAL , AGED
                                                   ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER
                                                   VILLAGE KADLAWAD PS CHAPIHEDA (MADHYA
                                                   PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....PETITIONER
                                                   (BY SHRI MANISH YADAV, ADVOCATE )

                                                   AND

                                                   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                                   HOUSE OFFICER THR.PS. CHAPIHEDA (MADHYA
                                                   PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                                   (BY SHRI HEMANT SHARMA, GA FOR STATE )

                                                 This PETITION coming on for ADMISSION this day, but with
                                            the consent of parties, heard finally and the court passed the
                                            following:
                                                                           ORDER

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of FIR arising out of Crime No.229/2019 registered at Police Station Chapiheda, Rajgarh as well as the subsequent proceedings pending before the trial Court under Section34(2) of M.P. Excise Act.

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.13 11:23:23 IST A s per the prosecution story, on 05.10.2019, on a secret information by the informer, the police has intercepted the Tavera

vehicle bearing registration No.MP-42BC-1052 carrying illegal liquor. When the police party intercepted, one person fled away from the spot and the police arrested on Bhupendra @ Bhanu. The police recorded his statement and implicated the applicant on the basis of statement of Co-accused Bhupendra @ Bhanu recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act. Hence, the case was registered against the petitioner and other co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of statements of

Co-accused Bhanu recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Except the memo of Co-accused Bhanu, there is nothing on record against the petitioner to implicate him in the present case. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the similar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court, in the case of Narendra Kumar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh passed in CRR No.341/2019 decided on 15.03.2019 has quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings pending against the petitioner therein. Hence, in view of the judgment passed in the case of Narendra Kumar (Supra), this petition is liable to be allowed.

On the other hand, counsel for the State has opposed the prayer by submitting that the petitioner was implicated due to his involvement in Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.13 11:23:23 IST transportation of illegal contraband. Hence, he is not entitled for any relief. However, on the specific query from this Court about other

evidence except the statements of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the counsel has replied negatively.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Section 27 of 'The Act', in terms, provides that only that information which distinctly relates to the discovery of fact is admissible in evidence. In the landmark decision of Privy Council in the case of Pulukuri Kottaya vs. Emperor, AIR 1947 P.C. 67, it has been held that unless there is discovery of fact, statement made u/S. 27 of 'The Act' has no evidentiary value. It has further been held that in a case, it can seldom happen that information leading to discovery of a fact can be made, the foundation of the prosecution case because it is one link in the chain of proof and the other links must be forged in the manner allowed by law.

Considering the fact that in the present case the only material to implicate the present applicant is the disclosure made by co-accused Bhanu, which is not a legal evidence, therefore this petition filed under section 482 of 'the Code' is allowed. The FIR arising out of Crime

No.229/2019 registered at Police Station Chapiheda, Rajgarh as well as the subsequent proceedings pending before the trial Court under Section34(2) of M.P. Excise Act , are hereby quashed. The petitioner is

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR discharged from the aforesaid charges. Date: 2022.05.13 11:23:23 IST

His bail bonds, if any, stands discharged.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed off. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information.

Certified copy as per Rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.13 11:23:23 IST