- (1.)BY this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code), the applicant has prayed to quash the First Information Report being Junagadh Police Station, I -C.R. No. 48/85 as well as further proceedings of Criminal Case No.1103/87 pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh in respect of the present applicant.
(2.)THE facts of the present case are more or less similar to the facts of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.711/94, which has been disposed of by an order of even date today. The facts of the said case have been elaborately set out in the said order. Hence, the same are not repeated herein. Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, he comes into the picture at the stage when the applicants of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.711/94 make an exit. Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, the raid on the premises of Shri Laxmandas Vishandas Trilokani had been conducted under the instructions of the present applicant and the sealed packet containing the seized goods had been handed over to him.
(3.)ACCORDING to the applicant who was working as Superintendent of Central Excise (Prevention) Branch at Junagadh at the relevant time, on 11th January, 1984 in the evening, the seized goods were brought to Junagadh and the sealed box was handed over to Cashier M.N. Solanki working in the, office of Assistant Collector of Customs and Excise at Junagadh who kept it in the shelf meant for storing valuables. The applicant was originally not named as an accused in the First Information Report but subsequently, at the time of filing the charge sheet, the applicant has been arraigned as the accused No.6 in the charge sheet. It is in the background of the aforesaid facts that the applicant has preferred the present application seeking to quash the proceedings insofar as he is concerned.
Heard Mr. R.D. Dave, learned advocate for the applicant, Mr. M.R. Mengdey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 and Ms. Shilpa R. Shah, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Central Government on behalf of the respondent No.2.