Allowed

Mohan Lal Choudhary and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC14 Nov 2014CR. MISC./23140/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous application, the Patna High Court set aside the impugned order rejecting the petitioners' application for discharge under Section 239 CrPC. The bench held that the lower court failed to apply its mind, did not examine the link between the accused and the alleged shop, and relied on a mere statement of an unknown person.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting the application for discharge is set aside and the petitioners are discharged under Section 239 CrPC.

Mohan Lal Choudhary and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.23140 of 2013

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. - 4 Year- 2011 Thana -SAHKUND District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== 1. Mohan Lal Choudhary, son of Late Lakhi Prasad Choudhary, 2. Alok Choudhary, son of Mohan Lal Choudhary, Both 1 and 2 resident of Patel Babu Road, P.S. Tilka Manjhi, Dist. Bhagalpur, Bihar, .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶3

ORAL ORDER

¶4

3 14-11-2014 Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate

¶5

for the petitioners.

¶6

The petitioners are proprietors of M/s Baba Corporation. They are sought to be prosecuted in connection with Sahkund P.S. Case No. 4/2011 (G.R. No. 74/2011) on the allegation that fertilizer was sold in the open market by the petitioners in the name of Madhukar Beej Bhandar. The licence for running Madhukar Beej Bhandar has not been renewed and therefore, in the garb of a non-existent shop, the petitioners realised more money from the farmers than what the actual price of such fertilizer should be. An enquiry was conducted and it was found that Madhukar Beej Bhandar is closed for a long time. The shopkeeper of a neighbouring shop also testified to the fact during

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23140 of 2013 (3) dt.14-11-2014

¶8

2/4

¶9

the enquiry that Madhukar Beej Bhandar is closed for a long time in the absence of the licence to run the shop. The allegation against the petitioners is that they have cheated the customers and deliberately provided the name of Madhukar Beej Bhandar, so that they could get a seal of protection in the name of the shop which now is non-existent.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are the dealers of fertilizer and have a valid licence to run a shop dealing in fertilizer. The name of the concern of the petitioners is Baba Corporation. The prosecution of the petitioners is solely based on the statement of a customer (person unknown to the petitioners) that high price was extracted from the farmers for supply of fertilizer.

¶11

Perused the documents annexed with the petition. The application preferred by the petitioners for discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected vide the order dated 20.04.2013 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhagalpur. The aforesaid order is under challenge.

¶12

A perusal of the impugned order clearly reflects that the court below did not at all advert to the materials available before it. All that the court stated while rejecting such a prayer is that sufficient materials are there to proceed against the

¶13

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23140 of 2013 (3) dt.14-11-2014

¶14

3/4

¶15

petitioners. There was no effort on the part of the court to at least find out as to what is the link between Madhukar Beej Bhandar and Baba Corporation. There is no material except for the stray statement by some unknown person about the petitioners having sold fertilizer on a higher price in the name of Madhukar Beej Bhandar. Learned counsel for the petitioners also pointed out to the Court during the course of argument that the enquiry report clearly states that the District Agriculture Officer was not very vigilant when he prepared the list of such shops dealing in fertilizer which were extracting more money from the farmers and, in that list, the name of Madhukar Beej Bhandar found mention. It appears that only to avoid himself being prosecuted or departmentally proceeded against, the District Agriculture Officer very cleverly turned the gaze of prosecution towards a licensed dealer of fertilizer.

¶16

The order does not reflect application of mind. The same is set aside. The petitioners are discharged in terms of Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

The application stands allowed.

¶18

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

¶19

Dilip/-

¶20

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23140 of 2013 (3) dt.14-11-2014

¶21

4/4

¶22

U T

Mohan Lal Choudhary and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Lal Choudhary and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

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

Ram Babu Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Ram Nath Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Anchal Kumar Pandey and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Md. Sallauddin and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Pawan Kumar Chaudhary Vs State of Bihar and Anr.

Bina Sinha and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.