1 criapln1753-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1753 OF 2010 Tarachand Bhikaji Uljale & Ors .. APPLICANTS V/s The State of Maha. .. RESPONDENT .... Mr.P.S.Agrawal, Adv.for applicants. Mr.D.V.Tele,APP.for State. .... CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE,JJ. DATE : 25/04/2011 ORAL ORDER 1] This application is filed for quashing the F.I.R. given against present applicants which is registered as C.R.No.60/10 at Hingoli City police station. 2] The revenue officer has given report to police that the revenue authorities had seized 3,40,000 bricks and 34 heaps of the bricks were kept in land survey no.37 and marking was done to show that the bricks were sealed. The revenue officer received information that in the night time, behind the back of the revenue officers, some 2 criapln1753-10 persons were committing theft of these bricks. On 9/3/10, at about 5 a.m. the Development Officer Shri Kudte and watchman Prabhu Shelke visited the spot and they noticed that some persons were loading the bricks in a tractor. The watchman knew 3 of the persons who were Shri Jigare, Shri Bhima and Shri Wajid Ali’s son. After seeing the revenue officer and the watchman, these persons ran away with the tractor. When inspection of 34 heaps was done, it was noticed that theft of 1 lac bricks worth Rs.2,00,000/- was committed. The other occasion when they visited the spot, they noticed that one tractor bearing No.MH-37-A-5055 was present on the spot and bricks were already loaded in the tractor. After seeing the officers,the persons ran away with the tractor. At 11 a.m. one more tractor bearing No.MXH-5581 in which around 3000 bricks were found loaded. When again inspection was done of the bricks, it was noticed that more bricks were stolen and there was theft of bricks worth Rs. 2,80,000/- . Report came to be given on 27/3/10 due to this incident. 3] It is not disputed that due to illegal activities, the bricks were already seized by the revenue authorities and the names of present applicants are shown as the persons who were illegally manufacturing the bricks in the land of the Government. It was submitted for the applicants that the bricks belong to the present applicants and civil suit is already filed by them in respect of their right with regard to the bricks. 3 criapln1753-10 4] Even if submission made for applicants is accepted as it is, the facts remains that the bricks were taken in custody by revenue authorities and so the aforesaid facts show that the bricks were removed behind the back of the revenue authorities, without their permission and the theft of the bricks was committed. In view of these circumstances, the investigation needs to be made in the matter. 5] Even the names of the applicants were not mentioned in the F.I.R. but they have rushed to the Court for quashing the F.I.R. It was submitted for the applicants that they were arrested in this crime and J.M.F.C. has already granted bail to them. If nothing is found against present applicants, investigating agency may file report under Section 169 of Cr.P.C. in due course but if there is material found against them, charge sheet can be filed against these persons. In view of these circumstances, it is not a fit case for quashing the F.I.R. and the application stands rejected. [T.V.NALAWADE,J.] umg/criapln1753-10