Rajeev Kumar @ Rajiv Kumar vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 14.01.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Rajganj P.S. Case No. 82 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 5178 of 2014 whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 408/34 of Indian Penal Code inter alia against the petitioner.

The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner is the accused of the said case. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the paid employee of Sharwasthi Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner and the accused person sold 381 bags of poultry feeds for their own benefit and misappropriated the entire sale proceeds.

On the basis of the written report, police registered Rajganj P.S. Case No. 82 of 2014 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of investigation, police found the allegations against the petitioner to be true and submitted charge sheet against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 408/34 of Indian Penal Code. Charge for the said offences has been framed against the petitioner and the petitioner is facing the trial and so far two witnesses have been examined during the trial and both of them have been declared hostile.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that so far 30 dates has been fixed during the trial and out of which on 23 dates the petitioner has appeared personally and on rest of the dates he was represented through his Advocate. The coaccused-Puran Kumar Sinha appeared personally on two occasions only. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the informant has never appeared before the learned trial court. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial is proceeding at snail’s pace and the learned trial court has issued letters to S.S.P., Dhanbad and D.G.P., Jharkhand to produce witnesses. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the co-accused-Puran Kumar Sinha challenged the cognizance order which was disposed of by the coordinate Bench of this Court as it was submitted by the learned counsel for the co-accused-Puran Kumar Sinha that he has been acquitted. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer made by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner of being a servant committed criminal breach of trust by dishonestly misappropriating the sale proceeds of 381 bags of poultry feeds. It is next submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. that the allegation against the petitioner was found to be true during the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that there is no justifiable reason to allow the prayer made by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition in exercise of its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, this Court finds that the main grievance of the petitioner appears to be that there is a delay in trial of the case. There is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner in furtherance of common intention with the co-accused person has committed the offence punishable under Section 408 of Indian Penal Code having committed criminal breach of trust by dishonestly misappropriating the sale proceeds of 381 bags of poultry feeds of his master; which was also found to be true in the investigation of the case and charge has already been framed against the petitioner and he is facing the trial.

Under such circumstances, this criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad to consider splitting the case of the petitioner if there is no chance of other accused being apprehended and attending the court proceeding in near future in case. Further, the learned trial court is directed to issue notices/summons to each of the witnesses cited in the charge sheet of this case. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad is directed to issue notice to the rest of the witnesses to be examined in this case, in three modes i.e.

(i) through the concerned police station,

(ii) through Nazarat, and

(iii) through registered with AD post.

and conclude the trial expeditiously by taking day to day trial of the case.

In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction only.