Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.5194 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Rabi Shankar S/O Late Shivbalak Prasad R/O Manager Blaze Flash Courier Limited Nishat Regency Frazer Road, Patna P.S- Kotwali Distt- Patna .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Om Prakash Chaudhary Prop M/S Tarabu Casettes Gandhi Chauck Sitamarhi P.S- And Distt- Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 7 23-11-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State In this case, petitioner is challenging the order dated 23rd March 2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Cr. Revn. No. 31 of 2010 whereby and whereunder the Sessions court has affirmed the order of cognizance dated 14th December 2009, arising from Tr. No. 1728 of 2010 by which the court below has taken cognizance under [STATUTE] . The complainant vide Complaint case No. C- 1651 of 2009 was filed by one Dipak Kumar against the officials of Blaze Flash Courier Ltd. and the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.3 in the complaint petition. It appears from the complaint petition that the complainant has been running Cassettes Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5194 of 2011 (7) dt.23-11-2012 2 / 5 2 shop in the name and style of M/s Tarang Cassettes. It has been stated that he has been doing the business of selling cassettes and had been purchasing the cassettes materials from Reliance Big International Pvt. Ltd., M/s International Organic Pvt. In course of business, some of the cassettes remained unsold and were of no use. Those cassettes were lying with his shop and the aforesaid companies had given a green signal for return of the same. Details of cassettes are mentioned at foot of the complaint petition worth Rs.1,13,224/-. The complainant approached the Area Sales Manager of Courier Company and they were ready to transship the cassettes to its destination and accordingly on 10th June 2009 at about 5:00 P.M. after proper verification, handed over the cassettes and the same were weighed 97 Kg. and packed in eight bags. Cassettes were booked and they were provided the receipt. On 7th July 2009O.P.No.2 informed the petitioner that transmitted material had not reached the destination. It has been alleged that the complainant approached accused Nos. 1 & 2 but they gave one excuse or the other. It has been alleged that the Courier Company did not hand over the aforesaid cassettes to its destination nor cassettes were returned to the complainant. It has been alleged that the complainant sent legal notice and asserted that the cassettes which were handed over to the company Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5194 of 2011 (7) dt.23-11-2012 3 / 5 3 were misappropriated by the Courier Company. On the basis of solemn affirmation and evidence of witnesses, the court below vide order dated 14th December 2009 took cognizance of the offence [STATUTE] including the petitioner who happens to be the Regional Manager of the Courier Company. Counsel for the petitioner submits that while transmitted cassettes were/are lying in the Office of Courier Company at Kolkata as The Sales Tax Department conducted a raid, because of not furnishing proof of payment of tax all the cassettes were seized. The reason for seizure was evasion of sales tax. After seizure of the cassettes, the Courier Company conveyed the complainant and requested to get the material released after payment of tax as has been assessed by the Sales Tax Department or if already tax was paid, to send the receipts. Counsel for the petitioner has relied on the letters which were addressed to the complainant where the detailed facts have been mentioned and there it has also been mentioned that the cassettes were lying with the Sales Tax Department of State of West Bengal. As the complainant did not produce any receipt for payment of sales tax nor they have approached for releasing of those cassettes on payment of tax assessed by the State Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5194 of 2011 (7) dt.23-11-2012 4 / 5 4 Government, ultimately it is the Courier Company paid the tax amount of Rs.24,444/- annexed to this petition as part of Annexure-4 and brought back the cassettes and those are lying in the Office. Counsel for the petitioner submits that all the cassettes which were booked by the complainant are lying in the Office of the Company and they are ready to release the same, subject to payment of amount already paid as tax and whenever it is paid, they are ready to return the same. Looking to the facts mentioned hereinabove, no case of misappropriation is made out as, as per the petitioner, they are ready to hand over the cassettes subject to payment of tax amount, as the Company has paid on behalf of complainant. In this view of the matter, this Court feels that the facts mentioned in the complaint petition and the surrounding circumstances show that no criminal offence is made out against the Courier Company or its Officers and, accordingly, the order of cognizance dated 14th December 2009, with respect to petitioner, is quashed. If the O.P.No.2 approaches the Cassettes Company, the company will be obliged to hand over the cassettes, subject to payment of tax that they have paid to the Sales Tax Department. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5194 of 2011 (7) dt.23-11-2012 5 / 5 5 consequently, the order dated 23rd March 2010 passed in Cr. Revn. No. 31 of 2010 is also quashed. Jay/- (Shivaji Pandey, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 409

Statute Text:
Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal breach of trust by public servant or by banker, merchant or agent, etc. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property in his capacity of a public servant or in the way of his business as a banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.