Back
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
BIVAS PATTANAYAK, J.
Sudipto Banerjee – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal - Respondent
CRR 72 of 2019
Decided on : 11-11-2022
Section 482 - Quashing of Criminal Proceeding - Indian Penal Code, Sections 420/120B, Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Sections 3/7, Petroleum Act, 1934, Section 23
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a partner in a petrol pump partnership firm, sought quashing of criminal proceedings against him for alleged adulteration of petrol with industrial solvent. The investigating agency filed a charge sheet against the petitioner and others under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Acts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that as a partner with a 51% share in the firm, the petitioner was jointly responsible for the activities within the partnership and the liabilities arising from such activities. The court dismissed the revisional application, stating that there were materials to continue with the proceeding.
Issues: The issues included the petitioner's knowledge and direct involvement in the alleged illegal activities undertaken in the partnership firm.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner, as a partner with a significant share in the firm, could not disown the liabilities arising from illegal activities. It also emphasized that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection.
Final Decision: The criminal revision was dismissed, with the court clarifying that its observations would not affect the petitioner's rights and contentions before the trial court.
JUDGMENT :
BIVAS PATTANAYAK, J.
1. The present revisional application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for quashing of proceeding being GR case no. 727 of 2018 (arising out of Birpara Police Station Case no. 47 of 2018 dated 05.05.2018 under Sections 420/120 B of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 23 of the Petroleum Act, 1934) pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 2nd court, Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri.
2. The brief fact of the case is that one Suraj Kumar Thakur, Inspector, Detective Department, Jalpaiguri lodged a written complaint with officer-in-charge, Birpara Police Station on 5 May 2018 alleging, inter alia, as follows.
(i) On 4 May 2018 the complainant received source information that an oil tanker bearing registration no. WB-71A-9909 containing solvent will arrive at Himalaya Agency, Birpara (an authorised petrol pump of Bharat Petroleum) and deliver huge quantity of solvent in order to adulterate the same with petrol and sell it to common people. Accordingly the complainant in order to work out the source information took necessary steps and proceeded to the spot along with raiding team.
(ii) At about 21.05 hours the oil tanker bearing registration no. WB-71A-9909 arrived at Himalaya Agency, Birpara and started unloading solvent in the underground reservoir of the aforesaid petrol pump.
(iii) The raiding team apprehended the driver of the tanker namely Bijoy Das and upon interrogation he disclosed that as per direction of one person he was unloading the industrial solvent from the tanker and on his identification one Vikash Mittal , brother of licence holder of the aforesaid petrol pump, was also apprehended.
(iv) The driver of the said tanker further disclosed that about 5000 L of solvent were being carried in the oil tanker from Dankuni as per instruction of one Pankaj Kumar Agarwal @ Tinku of Siliguri and that he had been called to the petrol pump by Vikash Mittal for mixing the solvent with the petrol at the petrol pump.
(v) Thereafter the oil tanker was seized along with a retail outlet sale register, samples of underground oil, delivery pipe, documents of the offending vehicle in presence of witnesses.
(vi) On measurement the contents of the oil tanker was found to be 7487 L and the underground of the pump was found to contain 5026 L of fuel.
(vii) On the basis of aforesaid complaint FIR was registered at Birpara Police Station being no. 47 of 2018 dated 05.05.2018 under Sections 420/413/414/467/120B of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and Section 23 of Petroleum Act against one Vikash Mittal (brother of the licence holder), Bijoy Das (driver of the tanker), Ashish Mittal (licence holder), M/s Himalaya Agency and the petitioner herein.
(vii) Upon completion of investigation the investigating agency submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and nine others under Sections 420/120B of Indian Penal Code, Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and Section 23 of Petroleum Act.
3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid proceeding the petitioner has preferred the present revision.
4. Mr Ranadeb Sengupta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the firm under the name and style of Himalaya Agency used to run petrol pump for the last 50 years on the basis of licence obtained from Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. The aforesaid petrol pump was developed over government leasehold land. The lease was given jointly in the name of father of the petitioner namely Sri Subrata Kumar Banerjee (since deceased) and grandmother of the petitioner namely Smt Renukana Banerjee (since deceased) and the said leasehold was renewed from time to time by the concerned authority and lastly it was renewed on 21st of November 1993 for a period of 30 years. Since 1990 the petitioner herein along with
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of fraud and criminal misrepresentation under Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code in the context of a partnership agre....
Misrepresentation leading to financial loss constitutes fraud under IPC, validating the need for charges under Sections 420, 468, and 471.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of prima facie proof of the offence, the absence of mens rea, and the burden of proof on the accused to rebut the presumption of g....
Vicarious liability under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act requires specific averments linking the accused to the commission of the offence, not mere implication.
Criminal proceedings initiated from civil disputes constitute an abuse of process, and courts must prevent misuse of criminal law for personal vendettas.
Court held that breaches of contract, if primarily civil in nature, do not implicate criminal liability unless fraudulent intent is evident from the outset.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
