- (1.) THE petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of order impugned dated 28.4.2009 passed in Cr. Rev No. 60 of 2009 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-1 Dhanbad affirmed the order dated 10.2.2009 by which the prayer of the petitioner for release of the coal was rejected by Shri A.K. Srivastava, judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dhanbad.
(2.) THE prosecution story in short was that a truck no. Jh-10F-2728 was intercepted by the police which was carrying coal and on verification it was found that the coal was being carried from KOCP Kuian Colliery and the net weight at the entry point was 15.420 tonnes of coal .When the truck was intercepted on 9.2.2008 and truck was weighed at the bridge, the weight of the coal was found 19.175 M.T and thereby 3.175 M.T of coal was found in excess of the challan produced and therefore, the informant police party had reason to believe that such excess quantity of coal was being carried illegally on the truck. On the written report of the informant,Jharia P.S. Case No. 58 of 2008 was registered for the alleged offence under section 414 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner was authorized person to lift the coal and against the valid document, coal was being carried on the truck. M/s Jayshree Coke Private Ltd purchased the coal on 6.2.2008 to which transport challan was issued by the B.C.C.L besides other relevant documents such as permit and Form-D and all these documents were produced before the informant when the truck was intercepted. The truck was carrying 15.420 M.T of coal which was initially driven by the driver namely S. Kumar but due to his personal work he went out from the truck and then steering of the truck was held by Puneet Rai.The petitioner was concerned with only 15.420 M.T of coal and if 3.175 M.T of coal was found in excess. The petitioner being the owner of coal of 15.4 M.T of coal was not at all concerned with the coal which were found in excess . The petitioner cannot be held responsible for carrying any quantity of coal beyond what was given against the chalalan. It is relevant to mention that M/s Jayshree Coke Private Limited had filed no objection petition before the trial court if the coal would be released in favour of the petitioner. Assailing the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the learned counsel submitted that the Criminal revision of the petitioner was dismissed only on the ground that the prayer for release of the coal was earlier rejected by the Trial Magistrate, on 17.5. 2008 against which no revision was preferred. The petitioner again filed petition with the same and similar relief which was rejected on 10.2.2009 and the petitioner then preferred revision against the order passed by the Trial Magistrate on 10.2.2009 and according to the Revisional court, revision was not maintainable only because the petitioner had not come against the first order and that first order had got finality. The learned Additional Sessions Judge misconceived the provision of law by ignoring that there was no bar at all in filing subsequent petition for release of the coal for reconsideration and thereby. the learned Additional Sessions Judge has committed error of law. The petitioner had claimed the coal only to the extent of 15.420 M.T and not in excess of 3.175 M.T of the coal against the valid documents. In the circumstances, this Cr. M.P is allowed and the trial court is directed to release the coal to the extent of 15.420 M.T in favour of the petitioner on verification of the entire documents on his executing indemnity bond of Rs one lakh with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri.A.K.Srivastava,Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dhanbad or his successor in G.R. No. 373 of 2008 with further direction that 3.175 M.T. of coal, which was found in excess, shall be auctioned sold and the sale proceeds shall be deposited with the State exchequer.;