The protection of public officials under section 197 Cr.P.C and the absurdity of allegations in a complaint can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

1. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in P.C.R.Case No.03/2016 pending in the court of Railway Judicial Magistrate, Madhupur, under sections 379, 427/34 of the I.P.C including the order taking cognizance dated 01.04.2017.

2. The O.P.No.2 has filed the criminal case alleging there in that in the said complaint the complainant described himself as the proprietor of Baidyanath Catering, which had taken contract to run the canteen and trolley at Jasidih Railway Junction. The complainant claimed to have running the said business since 1996 after making payment of rent regularly to the Railways as per terms of the contract.

3. It has been alleged that arbitrarily the rent had been enhanced 14 times (approx.) by the railway authorities against which the complainant claimed to have made written complaints to the authorities. He also claimed to have asked for the rounds of such alleged arbitrary enhancement of the rent; which was neither replied to nor there was any action taken for reducing the enhanced rent. Resultantly, he filed a writ petition, being W.P.No.5413 of 2016 before the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court, which is pending adjudication.

4. It has been further alleged that because of the order of the railway administration the complainant had been forced to close the canteen and trolleys. He had kept the four trolleys with articles worth Rs.50,000/- locked therein.

5. It has been further alleged that on the date and time of occurrence, the accused persons had broken the lock of the trolleys and misappropriated the entire article kept therein with the assistance of unknown persons causing loss to him of more than Rs.50,000/-. It has been also alleged that the accused persons threw away the trolleys on the back side of the station premises which fact would be evident from the photographs attached with the impugned complaint.

6. It has been further alleged that the alleged incident took place in his absence when he came to know about it he met the accused whereupon it had been said to him that since he had filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court against the railway administration so they (the accused persons) would ruin him. Allegation has been made of extending threat that if he would further agitate the matter, the lock of the canteen would also be broken and the articles kept there would be removed.

7. It has been further claimed that when he (the complainant) went to GRPS, Jasidih, he was advised to come through Court and accordingly this complaint is being filed.

8. Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are officers of Railways. The petitioner no.1 was Divisional Commercial Manager, Asansol Division, Eastern Railway (West Bengal) and the petitioner no.2 was Commercial Supervisor, posted at Jasidih Junction, Eastern Railway. Mr. Rai, the learned counsel further submits that pursuant to the agreement entered into between the Eastern Railway and the petitioner, he was provided a place of fixing the trolly in the Railway platform of Jasidih Railway station. He submits that the licence fee was settled in view of agreement dated 01.11.2005. Since the licence fee was not received an arrear to the tune of Rs.26,85,123/- has accrued against the O.P.No.2 and notice to that effect was issued on 08.06.2012. He further submits that the said demand notice was challenged by the O.P.No.2 before the Calcutta High Court in W.P. No.19855(W)/2015 and by order dated 08.09.2015 the writ petition was disposed of directing the Commercial Manager to hear the petitioners and pass fresh order. Pursuant to that, the petitioners were heard by the Railways and the reasoned order has been passed by order dated 19.10.2019 and fresh demand notice to the tune of Rs.54 lacs and odd has been issued against the O.P.No.2 which has been swelled to the tune of Rs.73,27,278/-. He further submits that the fresh order was again challenged by the