ORDER

1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.233/2020 (RSB Choupan Vs. Avinash Kumar Soni), pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Railway Court, Jabalpur, arising out of prosecution under Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989.

2. As per the case of the petitioner, he is an authorized IRCTC e-ticketing agent since the year 2015 and is running a cyber café under the name "Soni Cyber Café" at Singrauli. It is pleaded that he has been operating under authorized IRCTC Agent ID "ICTKTRP00093" and the certificates evidencing such authorization have been filed as Annexure A-1 (collectively). According to the prosecution, officials of the Railway Protection Force conducted a raid at the petitioner's cyber café and found that two railway tickets, namely PNR No.6235889021 relating to Train No.18101 TATA-JAT Express and PNR No.6134036107 relating to Train No.18241 Durg-Ambikapur Express, had been issued through the petitioner's personal IRCTC user ID instead of the authorized agent ID. On the basis of the said allegation, an offence under Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989 was registered and, after investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Railway Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the continuation of the criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of the process of law as no offence under Section 143 of the Railways Act is made out. It is contended that the petitioner is a duly authorized IRCTC agent and there is no material to establish that he was carrying on unauthorized business of procuring or supplying railway tickets. It is further submitted that the statements of independent witnesses Vakeel Ram and Kamal do not support the prosecution case inasmuch as they refer to the raid having been conducted on 20.11.2019, whereas the prosecution has alleged that the occurrence took place on 21.11.2019, thereby creating serious doubt regarding the genuineness of the investigation. It is also argued that at the time of the alleged raid the petitioner was not present at the shop, but was at Varanasi pursuing his studies and the Roznamcha entry produced as Annexure A-3 substantiates his absence. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner's father was present in the shop and was illegally detained by the RPF officials, while the computer system, printer and authorized IRCTC dongle were seized without authority. It is further contended that the petitioner is a Chartered Accountancy student as well as a law graduate, whose educational certificates have been filed as Annexure A-4 (collectively), and continuation of the criminal prosecution would seriously prejudice his future career. According to the petitioner, there is no allegation of misuse of the authorized IRCTC agency or wrongful gain, and therefore the prosecution deserves to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Railway Protection Force opposed the petition and submitted that the petition does not satisfy any of the recognized parameters warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction. It is submitted that during investigation it was found that the petitioner was issuing Tatkal railway tickets from his personal IRCTC ID instead of the authorized agent ID and was carrying on the business of procuring and supplying railway tickets for consideration, thereby attracting the offence punishable under Section 143 of the Railways Act. Learned counsel referred to the complaint dated 22.10.2019 filed by the Assistant Sub Inspector, RPF, which has been brought on record as Annexure R-1, and submitted that specific information regarding the petitioner's illegal activities had been received prior to the raid. It is further submitted that tickets, relevant electronic records and other incriminating material were seized from the petitioner's establishment, details whereof are containe