Priyanshu Boiragi Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P.D. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Phukan, the learned Public Prosecutor, State of Assam representing Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶22

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing and setting aside the charge sheets and the proceedings in respect of Special Case No.09/2021 arising out of CM’s SVC P.S. Case No.09/2017 pending in the court of Special Judge, Assam.

¶23

3. The petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. Purbashree Printing House. It is alleged in the FIR that for printing 6183134 numbers of leaflets (school routine), same numbers of folders and same numbers of booklets, a contract worth ₹29,98,81,999/-, was given to M/s. Purbashree Printing House. It is further alleged in the FIR that the contract was given in an exhorbitant rate and also in violation of Rules and procedures, which caused huge loss to the State exchequer. The informant alleged that the said contract was given in such a manner as it was for illegal gain for the persons who awarded the contract to the said press. Same allegation has been made against the present petitioner being the owner of the said press.

¶24

Page No.# 3/6

¶25

4. On conclusion of investigation, police field charge sheets against the present petitioner and some other persons.

¶26

5. Mr. Kamar has submitted that in the final charge sheet, it was stated that there was no illegal money transaction, no illegal gratification and no money laundering done by the present petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bank Account of the petitioner was defreezed. The seized properties were also released. It is also stated in the Final Charge Sheet that the Central Forensic Science Laboratory did not find anything from the seized digital exhibits. According to Mr. Kamar, that vide letter dated 05.09.2020, the Commissioner of State GST, Assam had categorically stated that M/s. Purbashree Printing House had supplied all the materials during the three years period.

¶27

6. During the period of investigation, a Chartered Accountant was engaged to examine all the transactions relating to the present case. The learned counsel Mr. Kamar has pointed out that the report of the Chartered Accountant disclosed that all the purchases made for execution of the aforesaid contract, were genuine. The Chartered Accountant also disclosed in its report that no money laundering was done by the present petitioner. According to the report of the Chartered Accountant, the Bank Accounts of the present petitioners never showed that he had ever made payments to Chohan Doley and Gautam Baruah. On the basis of the report of the Chartered Accountant, Mr. Kamar has pointed out that the said report disclosed that the petitioner was financially sound and he had an amount of ₹87 lakhs in his bank accounts before he had got the contract.

¶28

7. The learned counsel Mr. Kamar has submitted that the prosecution side failed to produce evidence to show that the bank drafts were made on behalf of other firms by the present petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that the prosecution has not claimed anywhere in the three numbers of charge sheets that the Government statutory documents submitted by other bidders were fake.

¶29

Page No.# 4/6

¶30

8. Mr. Kamar concluded his argument by stating that the petitioner is a genuine businessman and he has been subjected to harassment by this case. He filed tenders and got the contract and executed the work. Finally, he got the money. According to Mr. Kamar, the Investigating Officer failed to collect materials against the present petitioner to justify a trial against him in the court of law.

¶31

9. Per contra, Mr. Phukan has submitted that the prosecution deserves to be given one opportunity to prove its case. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, many things are yet to be proved in the trial and therefore, this is not a fit case for exercising the power under Section 482 of the CrPC.

¶32

10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.

¶33

11. In the Final Chare Sheet, it is stated that no illegal money transaction or no payment of monetary gratification or money laundering was done by the present petitioner in the said case.

¶34

12. The crux of the allegation is that some people gave a contract involving a large amount of money to the present petitioner. The allegation brought by the informant is that the said contract was valued at an exhorbitant price and for which some people who gave the contract to the petitioner had caused a huge loss to the State. But the materials available in the record shows that during investigation, it was found that the petitioner never had any monetary transaction with those people who awarded him the contract, nor any material could be found to show that he paid monetary gratification to anyone.

¶35

13. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the judgment reads as under:

¶36

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and

¶37

Page No.# 5/6

¶38

reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

¶39

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

¶40

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

¶41

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

¶42

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

¶43

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

¶44

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

¶45

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

¶46

14. In the charge sheet itself, it is stated that the Investigating Officer could not find any materials against the present petitioner for offences like- illegal financial transaction, payment of monetary gratification or money laundering. There is no possibility of conviction of petitioner in the trial. So, allowing the criminal proceedings, against the present petitioner only, to continue before the trial court would be noting but an abuse of the process of the court. This Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC.

¶47

Page No.# 6/6

¶48

15. For the aforesaid premised reasons, for the present petitioner Priyanshu Boiragi, the proprietor of M/s. Purbashree Printing House, the charge sheets and the proceedings in respect of Special Case No.09/2021 arising out of CM’s SVC P.S. Case No.09/2017 pending in the court of Special Judge, Assam, are quashed and set aside.

¶49

The Criminal Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶50

JUDGE

¶51

Comparing Assistant

Priyanshu Boiragi v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanshu Boiragi v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Md. Iyad Ali @Iyadul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Saifuddin Ahmed @ Md. Saifuddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Ashish Saha Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Tapan Saha Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Jayanta Bharali Vs the State of Assam

Simon Mao Vs the State of Assam and Anr.