Criminal Writ No.810 of 2006 For quashing of order of investigation of Sasaram Town Police Station Case No. 413 under Section 7 of the E.C. Act. -------- 1. Shiv Shankar Prasad Gupta, son of Sri Babulal Sah, resident of Mohalla- Noorganj, Sasaram, P.S. Sasaram, District-Rohtas, Proprietor of Messers Gupta Khad Agency, Sasaram, P.S. Sasaram, District- Rohtas. 2. Banarsi Chaudhary, son of late Raj Kumar Chaudhary, resident of village-Dara-Nagar, P.S. Nauhatta, District-Rohtas, Proprietor of Messers Ravi Khad Bhandar, Village Dara Nagar, P.S. Nauhatta, District-Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Agricultural Officer, Rohtas. 3. The Officer-in-Charge, Sasaram Town P.S. Sasaram 4. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram .... Respondent/s ------------- P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J. By filing instant Cr.Writ, the applicants who happen to be figured as an accused of Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 413/2006, registered under Section 7 of the EC Act have made prayer for quashing of the investigation of the aforesaid case bearing Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 413/2006. 2. Shiv Dutt Kumar Sinha, District Agricultural Officer, Rohtas filed a written report on 12.09.2006 disclosing therein that on 11.09.2006 at about 5:30 P.M. he along with Subdivisional Magistrate, Sasaram had intercepted one truck bearing registration no. MP-27- 2 8371 which was loaded with Urea fertilizers. On query the driver had produced Chalan No.21 dated 11.09.2006 which disclosed transfer of 200 bags of Urea fertilizers from M/s Gupta Khad Agency, Naikagaon to M/s Ravi Khad Bhandar, Daranagar. When the establishment of M/s Gupta Khad Agency was verified, the proprietor had accepted the same, however, no cash-memo was issued and therefore informant along with SDM suspected that the aforesaid transportation was being done for black-marketing in contravention of Fertilizer Control Order. Accordingly, articles were seized for which seizure list was prepared and the case has been registered. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the prosecution happens to be bad in law as well as on facts hence, is fit to be quashed. Further submitted that the aforesaid fertilizers were being supplied to the consignee on credit and that was the reason behind that no cash-memo was issued instead thereof credit invoice was issued which happens to be Annexure-4 of the petition. Not only this, the sale is further supported with Annexure 5 and 6 photocopy of stock register (supplementary affidavit). So submitted that in the background of the aforesaid authenticated document. Continuance of investigation will serve no fruitful purpose, apart from being an abuse of the process of Court. Also submitted that from perusal of written report no case is made out as such the FIR followed with investigation is fit to be 3 quashed and for that relied upon (1989) 4 SCC 59. In para 6 of the judgment the Hon’ble Apex Court has held:- “The High Court has rightly held that as the criminal proceedings have been started against the respondent on the basis of an FIR which does not contain any definite accusation, it amounts to an abuse of process of the court and, as such, is liable to be quashed. We entirely agree with the view expressed by the High Court.” 4. Thus, it is submission of the learned counsel of the petitioners that FIR of Sasaram Town P.S. Case No.413/2006 is fit to be quashed. 5. On the other hand, the learned APP submitted that the High Court cannot put its leg into the shoes of investigating authority to see and adjudge the defence pleaded by the petitioner. The genuineness of Annexure-4, 5, 6 is subject to verification and until and unless the same is verified and found to be correct, the allegation on its face justify its continuance. 6. In a decision reported in (2006) 1 SCC (Cri) 324 at paragraph-2 it has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ By the impugned order, the High Court has quashed FIR No.55 dated 27.04.2001. The FIR was registered against four respondents for having committed theft of cheel logs from the forest of Kukanet. In sum and substance, the allegation is of illegal felling of trees and theft of the same from the forest. Curiously, the High Court by entering into the factual arena has passed the impugned order quashing the FIR. Such a course is wholly impermissible. The High Court acted more as an investigating agency at a stage when the FIR was under investigation. At this stage, we wish to say no more lest it may prejudice the parties”. 4 7. The same view further finds support from another decision reported in (2007) 14 SCC 497 where-under at paragraph-3 it has been held:- “ Having heard the parties and perused the records, we are of the view that the High Court was not justified at this stage to examine the matter and quash the police investigation, which was pending against the respondent Laxmi Dhaul”. 8. Thus, the law is now well settled that the High Court while exercising the power and invoking its jurisdiction cannot substitute itself posing to be an investigating officer and investigate with regard to defence pleaded by the accused which is subject to verification. Therefore, the instant writ is found to be misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. 9. However, it will be open to the investigating authority to see and verify Annexure-4,5,6 over its genuineness during course of investigation. Patna High Court The 9th day of September 2011 Md. Perwez Alam/NAFR (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)