High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ajay Kumar vs State Of Bihar on 27 July, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ajay Kumar vs State Of Bihar on 27 July, 2011
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Cr.Misc. No.34092 of 2008
Ajay Kumar, Son of Nathuni Prasad Sinha, Resident of Village Dumduma Hasanpur, PS Vaishali,
                               District Vaishali ---- Petitioner
                                           Versus
                             State Of Bihar ---- Opposite Party

For the Petitioner :   Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
                       Mr. D.N. Tiwary, Advocate
                       Mr. K.C.K. Sinha, Advocate
For the State:         Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.
                                            -----------

4 27.7.2011 A First Information Report registered as Hajipur PS Case

No. 456 of 2007 has been instituted by the Marketing Officer, Hajipur

on 23.8.2007 alleging that the petitioner who is a transporter had not

delivered the food grains from Muzaffarpur godown to Hajipur

godown.

Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the case diary

and also to the fact that he had received the food grains on 19th of

August, 2007 from the B.S.F.C. godown at Muzaffarpur and was to

deliver the same by 20th of August, 2007. Due to crowds of

‘Kawariyas’ during the month of ‘Shravan’, he could not deliver the

food grains to the godown at Hajipur as the road was almost blocked.

Accordingly, he informed the District Magistrate, Hajipur regarding

the said delay. It was after two days that he was able to deliver the

food grains to the godown at Hajipur. This fact is disclosed at

paragraph nos. 20, 28 and 29 of the case diary. The Marketing

Officer, Hajipur refused to receive the same. Thereafter he informed

the S.D.O. that the food grains should be received by the informant.

The food grains was received by him on 23.8.2007 and on the same

date the Marketing Officer, Hajipur has filed this case alleging that the
2

food grains had been supplied after a delay of two days.

The fact that there is a delay of two days in transportation

cannot be a ground for coming to the conclusion that the petitioner is

guilty of the offence under Sections 409, 420, 120B/34 of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. Infact

no offence is made out under these sections, as this is neither a case of

misappropriation or cheating nor a case where it can be said that the

petitioner is responsible for selling the food grains in black market.

In the result, this Court quashes the order of cognizance

dated 12.3.2010, passed in Hajipur Town PS Case No. 456 of 2007.

This application is allowed.

Sanjay                                              (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)