P. Velmurugan, J.

The case of the revision petitioner is that he has been arrayed as an accused in the C.C.No.15218/2014 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai - 8, and alleged to have committed an offence punishable under section 428 of IPC. The case was originally registered under the impression that certain officials of the railway were involved and hence, provision of Prevention of Corruption Act was invoked in the FIR. Now after investigation, the respondent police have removed all the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act by saying no official was involved and filed charge sheet only u/ section 420 of IPC, arraying this petitioner as sole accused, alleging violation of contract conditions. He has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He has been arrayed as an accused in a false case, which was registered without any basis. The transaction between the petitioner and the railways is based on a contract and the said contract clearly spells out the penalty clause for violation of the terms of the contract and more particularly, in respect of over loading. Admittedly the allegations in the case are about over loading of parcel van (VPH) which was done in New Delhi, this is purely due to oversight and there was no malafide intention on the part of the petitioner. The railways themselves had charged penalty for such overloading as per the terms of the agreement and the said penalty was also duly paid. Therefore, no criminal offence is committed warranting any criminal prosecution before the trial court to frame any charge against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner had filed the petition before the trial court praying to discharge him from the above case in Crl.M.P.No.222/2015 but the same was dismissed by the trial court by its order dated 07.07.2015. Against the said order of dismissal of his discharge application, the petitioner herein prefers this revision petition to set aside the said order in Crl.M.P.No.222/2015 in CC.No.07.07.2015 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2. The petitioner has filed this revision mainly on the grounds that even assuming that entire materials available on records were taken to be true, the ingredients of the offence prima facie not made out. No case of criminal prosecution is made out as against the petitioner. The reading of the statements of all the witnesses cited in the charge sheet, the documents that are listed and relied upon by the prosecution all would clearly show that there is no iota of material to proceed as against this petitioner for the alleged offence under section 420 of IPC. No wrongful loss was caused to the railways and there is no prima facie materials as against the petitioner herein to say that he has involved in any wrongful act and dishonest intention. There is no materials to frame any charge as against the petitioner. He is an innocent and law abiding citizen. He has been falsely implicated without any materials to be proceeded as against him. Therefore, this petition is liable to be allowed and the order passed in CRL.M.P.No.222 of 2015 in C.C.No.15218 of 2014 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008, be set aside.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner entered into an agreement with the Chief Commercial Manager, Southern Railways for leasing parcel space in parcel vans in trains bearing Nos.16031/16032 for transportation of parcels from Chennai Central and Delhi and Jammu tawi and back for a period of 3 years commencing from 19.01.2014 to 18.01.2017 in Jammu Tawi Express. The purpose of the agreement is that a permanent parcel space in the parcel van of the above said train would be provided to the petitioner on three days of every week (i.e,) on Wednesday, Thursday and Sunday in Train No.16031 from Chennai Central to Jammu Tawi and on Tuesday, Friday and Saturday in Train No.16032 from Jam