S.NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS revision under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing the entire proceeding of G.R. Case No. 1477 of 1995 pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Jalpaiguri arising out of a First Information Report giving rise to Kotwali P.S. Case No. 485 of 1995 dated 24.12.95 under Sections 407/409 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE accusation in the F.I.R. is that on physical verification of the stocks in between 13.12.95 to 18.12.95 at State Warehousing Corporation, Jalpaiguri Branch there was estimated shortage of 8000 quintals of foodgrains worth about Rs. 51 lakhs, which belonged to and was owned by the Food Corporation of India (in short F.C.I.). The Zonal Officer of the Stateware Housing Corporation (in short S.W.H.C.), namely, Sri Kanti Pada Sarkar lodged an FIR with accusation against Sri Chunilal Bani, being the Superintendent In -charge of the S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri as also some other staff of the said S.W.H.C. as also some officials of the F.C.I. attached to the S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri, including the present petitioner. Be it noted that the stock -in - question actually belonged to the F.C.I. and the S.W.H.C. was the custodian of the said stock on behalf of the F.C.I. On the very face of the FIR, the involvement of the officers and staff of the F.C.I. and the S.W.H.C. both has been asserted and alleged in the FIR. While the investigation is still going on, the petitioner has come up to quash the entire proceeding arising out of the FIR. He was, of course, one of the named accused in the FIR.
(3.) BE it recorded at the very outset that the petitioner was an employee of the F.C.I., Maynaguri AG -II(D) and was admittedly attached with the work of S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri during the relevant period of the occurrence, said to have occurred in S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to a notification of F.C.I., Jalpaiguri dated 1.1.93 which speaks of partial modification of an earlier letter dated 28.10.92 that the petitioner as also some other employees of the F.C.I. attached to the work of S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri would attend S.W.H.C. Jalpaiguri and the railway siding at the place as and when rakes are placed/unloaded and that he should not attend S.W.H.C. for normal delivery of stocks and other purposes. With reference to this notification, it was urged that the petitioner was not concerned with the stocks in custody of S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri. In any view of the matter, this contention makes out only a defence subject to consideration in the backdrop of the whole facts. The real substance or the crux of the matter remains on admission that the petitioner was attached with the work of S.W.H.C., Jalpaiguri. The above notification was only with regard to certain aspect of his duties; and the other duties assigned to him were yet to be gathered from the original letter of his deployment with S.W.H.C. or the earlier notification dated 28.10.92 (referred to above). Simply because the petitioner happens to be an employee of the F.C.I. and is not directly under the employment of S.W.H.C., it cannot be a valid ground to throw away the entire investigation.;