Dismissed

Rajib Sarma v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC11 Mar 2019Crl.Pet./152/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a criminal FIR alleging he impersonated an employee to defraud consumers by tampering with meters. The High Court dismissed the quash petition, finding a prima facie case out based on material evidence and the petitioner's admission of misconduct. The inquiry was directed to proceed with investigation.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the FIR was dismissed, allowing the investigation to proceed.

Rajib Sarma Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Corruption | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010194122016

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 152/2016

¶5

Sri Rajib Sarma, Son of late Sankhadhar Sarma, Madhupur, P.S. Nagaon, Nagaon district(Assam).

Petitioner.

-Versus-

(1)State of Assam.

(2)Pintu Dekaraja, Deputy Manager, APDCL, Nagaon Electrical Sub-division I, Nagaon district(Assam).

¶10

Respondent.

¶11

For the petitioner : Mr F Haque, Adv.

¶12

For the respondents : Mr BD Das, Sr Adv.

¶13

Date of hearing and judgment: 11.3.2019.

¶14

Page No.# 2/5

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶17

JUGEMNT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶18

Heard Mr F Haque, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr BD Das, learned senior counsel of APDCL.

¶19

(2) By this petition u/s 482 of the CrPC petitioner sought quashing the FIR dated 24.12.2015 based on which Nagaon Special PS case 48/2015 u/s 150 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was registered against him followed by GR case 6541/2015.

¶20

(3) Sri Pintu Dekaraja, Deputy Manager of Assam Power Development Corporation Ltd at Nagaon lodged an FIR at the Nagaon Special Police Station alleging that the petitioner is involved in tampering with meters along with his companions at various locations of Nagaon Town and as per the consumer statement he used to demand huge money from consumers introducing himself to be an employee of the corporation and

¶21

tamper with their meters. Receiving this FIR investigation was

¶22

Page No.# 3/5

¶23

conducted and the informant and other witnesses were also examined.

¶24

(4) Prior to the filing of the FIR, one consumer Md Moidul Hoque lodged a complaint with the Deputy Manager of the Nagaon Electrical Division stating that petitioner has taken Rs 5,000 to replace the meter of his house assuring that he will do all the official works. Mr Hoque being a govt. servant has no time to spare and so has paid the said amount in view of the undertaking given by petitioner. But nothing was done. Later, based on this complaint the matter was probed by the corporation. It was found that the petitioner was indulging in such meter-tampering works at various places for which the FIR was filed.

¶25

(5) Now the petitioner contends that he is an employee of the corporation and has been issued an identity card to read the meter and is no way connected with the allegations made in the FIR.

¶26

(6) Terming the allegations as false and concocted that has been tried to project that at the instance of the informant he took Rs 5,000 and the said amount is already deposited with the department in a phased manner, petitioner contends that since he has already deposited the amount and being a govt. employee his whole service career will be affected if such criminal proceeding is continued against him and hence filed this petition for quashing and setting aside the FIR.

¶27

Page No.# 4/5

¶28

(7) Learned senior counsel Mr Das contends that petitioner is not an employee of the department as contended by him. In fact, he was employed on casual basis as far back as 2008 as a meter reader for one year and no other official task was entrusted to him to collect such amount, tampering meters etc, but after the complaint lodged by a consumer an inspection was made by the department in the meter of the said consumer and the meter was found to be tampered with. It was found that the sanctioned load of the meter was 5kw but the connected load detected was 24kw and as a result which the concerned meter was collected to further investigate by MTI Laboratory.

¶29

(8) It is submitted that serious complicity of the petitioner is reflected in the entire matter. More so when the fact is that he is no more an employee of the department. If he continued such illegality activities in the name of the department it will indulge in his criminal culpability besides the offences under the APDCL and urged that a thorough investigation into the entire matter is required in view of the prima facie complicity of the petitioner and hence the question of quashing the FIR does not arise.

¶30

Page No.# 5/5

¶31

(9) It is now admitted position that the petitioner is not an employee in the year 2015 in the department yet had collected money impersonating himself an employee of the department. Besides, he has also admitted to have collected the money and returned the same which is another serious impact of his conduct.

¶32

(10) In view of such material on record a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner and investigation should be properly carried out to unearth his conduct in tampering with meters of the consumers, earning money in deceitful means, etc etc. In view of the matters on record invocation of Section 482 of the CrPC to interfere the investigation is not proper. The petition has no merit and the same is dismissed.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Na/

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Rajib Sarma v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajib Sarma v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nayan Khodal Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Kartik Sena Singha Vs Debashis Chakraborty and Anr.

Diganta Chakraborty Vs the Directorate of Enforcement, Govt. of India

Abed Ali Vs the State of Assam

Bhupen Chandra Pegu Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Rima Sharma Vs the State of Assam and Anr.