Back
SANJAY PRASAD
Raj Chouhan @ Karpoori – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
1. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 05.05.2018 passed by the learned C.J.M. Dhanbad in connection with the Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 427 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1685 of 2012 registered under Section 414/34 of the I.P.C. whereby the learned C.J.M. Dhanbad has rejected the petition dated 26.04.2018 filed by the petitioner for release of 32 MT stem coal, although the petitioner has already been acquitted in Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 427 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1685 of 2012 from the court of learned C.J.M. Dhanbad vide judgment dated 02.04.2018.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 2.5.2012 the police on receiving secret information at around 7.45 in the morning, had conducted a raid in the premises of Coal Briquette Plant of late Jayantri Chowdhary and had found there one Truck No. JH-10M-2815 and had seen some persons unloading the coal in the factory premises. However, on seeing the police party, some persons started fleeing away and after chase, the police arrested one person, whereas other persons fled away and the apprehended person di
The court emphasized the necessity for timely action regarding seized property and the obligation of the learned C.J.M. to follow statutory provisions for disposal post-trial.
Constructive possession of stolen railway property suffices for conviction under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, and confessions recorded by RPF officers are admissible as evidence.
Interpretation of vaioud relevant provisions of Code under Chapter XIV and of principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to exercise of extraordinary power under Art....
Point of law: Necessary ingredients for invocation of the powers under Section 457 of the Code having thus not been fulfilled, the provisions of the section cannot be said to be attracted.
The contractor is responsible for preventing theft and complying with contract terms; failure to do so justifies termination of the contract.
The concerned Magistrate has the power to release the vehicle under Sections 457 Cr.P.C. unless the goods/vehicle have been confiscated. Prompt exercise of powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. is importa....
Sections 451 and 452 of CrPC serve distinct purposes; ownership claims in recovered property must be substantiated by evidence, regardless of acquittal of accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the power of the Mining Engineer to seize the vehicle and the authority of the concerned Magistrate to release the seized vehicle under certain con....
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
