- (1.) THIS application under Section 482 Of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the investigation by the police in Dumka Town v P.S. Case No. 189 of 2001 dated 1 28.11.2001 under Sections 461, 471; 429 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) FACTS giving rise to the application are that one Baldeo Raj who is District Transport Officer, Dumka lodged an F.I.R. with Dumka Town P.S. alleging therein that the petitioner who is proprietor of Indian Auto Centre having his shop at Bhagalpur Dumka Road has sold two wheelers in the names of persons, application for registration of whom was filed before D.T.O. on 22.11.2001. The documents attached with the registration are also annexed with the application. He has given details in the petition and two wheelers were issued in the names of Chandan Murmu, Subhash Bhagat, Barnawal Soren and Smt. Jyotika Das respectively showing that there is long gap in between date of sale, deposit of tax and date of insurance and this has been done in order to misappropriate Government tax and the proprietor of the Indian Auto Centre had committed forgery and cheating. On the basis of this written complaint, a case being Dumka Town P.S. Case No. 189 of 2001 dated 28.11.2001 under Section 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that delivery of two wheeler is made by a dealer to the party concerned when they make full payment against the same. Learned counsel further pointed out that liability to get his two wheeler from any dealer is of the purchaser or the customer himself who is to apply for the same after doing all required formalities of the registration in the office of District Transport Officer and the petitioner has no concern with the work of the said registration of the vehicle. The learned counsel further pointed out that under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act or the Rules, owner of the vehicle has to apply for registration by filling up and signing different forms, affidavits as prescribed in this behalf by the Government and the said owner is also required to deposit the fees of registration and one time tax through proper Treasury Challans and this challans showing the deposit of all taxes and fees are attached by the owner with his petition. But the petitioner's liability ceases when he issues the sale certificate and delivers the vehicle to his customer and as such, the petitioner is in no way can be prosecuted for any offence. The learned counsel further pointed out that there is no allegation that this petitioner forged any documents of Government paper nor there is any allegation that he had used any forged document as genuine, which is known to be forged, and as such, that question that the petitioner has committed said offence does not arise. Learned counsel further pointed out that Chandan Murmu purchased his two wheeler on 31.10.2000 but by mistake the said date was entered as 6.11.2001 in the sale register of the petitioner, but when the matter was detected Chandan Murmu duly filed an application requesting the informant to rectify the defect which is permissible. On account of illness, Chandan Murmu could not deposit the paper applied for registration of his vehicle, which will be clear from the Annexure -3 and the petitioner being a dealer he was in no way responsible to deposit any fee or taxes for registration of sold vehicle. Learned counsel further pointed out that the entire fees, taxes, etc. are deposited in the name of owner and not in the name of dealer and as such, no question arises about cheating or forgery. It was also .pointed out that after institution of the case, the informant being the registering authority registered all the vehicles in favour of their respective owners (purchaser of the vehicles) on the same terms and conditions and issued R.C. Book also in their favour. Learned counsel further pointed out that in course of applying the registration of a vehicle, the owner has to submit the certificate of the insurance with the sale certificate in Form 21 along with appropriate fees as specified in Rule -81 through Bank Challan and, therefore, whatever allegations levelled against the petitioner is false and baseless.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that in order to misappropriate taxes, this offence has been committed by the petitioner.;