Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Lalit Kishore – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani assisted by Mr. Ashwini Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the State.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 07.02.2008 passed in Namkum P.S. Case No.3 of 2006 (G.R. No.71 of 2006), pending in the court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.
3. The FIR was lodged alleging therein that on 03.01.2006 through secret information regarding carriage of rice from one truck to another, during the course of enquiry, it was found that the truck loaded with rice bearing Truck No. BR 14A-0781 vide Challan No.437170 vide Circular No.87457. It was further alleged that Godown Manager- Lalit Kishore failed to produce any document. It was also alleged that the petitioner allowed supply/distribution of the food articles, rice bags in absence of Supply Inspector and thereby violated the rules, procedures giving rise to suspicion that the petitioner has allowed removal of rice bags for the purpose of sale in black market. It was also alleged that seizure list was prepared in presence of two witnesses.
4. Learned counsel for the petiti
The main legal point established in the judgment is the supremacy of the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 over previous orders, and the requirement for authorized authority for search....
The provisions of the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 prevail over previous orders of State Governments, and unauthorized search and seizure is illegal.
Unauthorized search and seizure by an authority not authorized by the State Government under the Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001, vitiates the institution of the FIR and criminal pro....
Unauthorized search and seizure by an unauthorised authority vitiates the institution of criminal proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act.
Procedural lapses in FIR registration render subsequent search and seizure invalid, emphasizing the importance of following legal protocol in criminal actions.
Mandatory registration of FIR is required for cognizable offences, and failure to adhere to this process invalidates subsequent legal actions.
Mandatory registration of FIR is required for cognizable offences, and unlawful seizure of goods without proper procedure contravenes established legal principles.
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
