IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 770 of 2007
Md. Siraj and Anr. ... ... ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Jharkhand and Anr. ... ... ... Opp. Parties
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR
............
For the Petitioners : Mr. Brij Bihari Sinha, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
7 /20.09.2011 This application has been filed for quashing the First
Information Report in connection with Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No.25
of 2007 dated 24.01.2007.
It is submitted by Sri Brij Bihari Sinha, learned counsel for
the petitioners that from averments made in the First Information
Report, no offence made out, therefore, First Information Report be
quashed. He further submits that there is an agreement between the
parties for sale of truck. He then submits that in pursuance of said
agreement, the truck was transferred in the name of informant, but in
spite of that she is not paying the price of truck. It is submitted that
when petitioners gave legal notice for payment of price of truck, present
case filed.
Having heard the submission, I have gone through the
record of the case. From perusal of First Information Report, I find that
there is specific allegation against petitioner no.1 that even after taking
advance, he did not transfer the truck and when informant requested
him for transferring the same, he abused her. It is also alleged that
petitioner get papers of aforesaid truck prepared in his own name. It also
appears that on demand, petitioner refused to pay aforesaid amount.
Thus, from perusal of First Information Report, it appears that prima
facie offence under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code is
made out against petitioners. As it has been held by Their Lordships of
Hon’ble Supreme Court in number of decisions that if from perusal of
First Information Report, prima facie cognizable offence is made out,
then at the threshold investigation cannot be stayed.
In view of the discussions made above, I am not inclined to
interfere with the First Information Report. The defence taken by
petitioners can be looked into by the investigating agency.
I find no merit in this application. Accordingly, same is
dismissed.
(Prashant Kumar, J.)
R.K.