- (1.) This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 18.9.1998 passed in connection with Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No. 119 of 1991 (G.R. No. 653 of 1991) whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 380, 411, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner. Before proceeding with the matter, the order passed on 15.1.2013 needs to be recorded. Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that this petitioner, who happened to be the Executive Vice President of the company namely, M/s. Amrit Vanaspati Pvt. Ltd., has been made accused in a case registered as Chaibasa (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 119 of 1991 (G.R. No. 653 of 1991) along with other persons namely, Ramesh Chandra Jain and Rajeev Pal Singh, who also happened to be the Sr. Manager, Banking and Taxation and Sr. Vice President (Commercial) respectively, for commission of the offences under Sections 380, 411, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. On submission of charge-sheet, cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 380, 411, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of Indian Penal Code was taken not only against this petitioner but also against Ramesh Chandra Jain and Rajeev Pal Singh. When application for discharge had been rejected by the Court below, those two persons moved to this Court in Cr. M.P. No. 609 of 2005. This Court having regard to the facts and circumstances did hold in the case of Ramesh Chandra Jain and Rajeev Pal Singh (Cr. M.P. No. 609 of 2005) that in the face of allegation the petitioners cannot be prosecuted under the general law as said allegation does constitute offence under Section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act 1956. At the same time, it was also held on the fact of the case that in absence of any specific allegation petitioners of that case (Cr. M.P. No. 609 of 2005) cannot be prosecuted under the principle of vicarious liability and thereby the order, under which prayer for discharge was rejected, was quashed. The petitioner though never moved application for discharge but if the petitioner is relegated to the Court below for filing application for discharge, it would be an empty formality, as this Court has already given finding to the effect that no case under the Indian Penal Code is made out against Ramesh Chandra Jain and Rajeev Pal Singh whose case was at par with this petitioner and, therefore, this petitioner has challenged the order taking cognizance. In view of the submission, post this case on 12.2.2013 so that in the meantime, the State may file counter-affidavit. Till then, further proceeding of Chaibasa (Sadar) P.S. Case No. 119 of 1991 (G.R. No. 653 of 1991) pending in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa shall remain stayed so far petitioner-Rohit Khaitan is concerned.
(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Chaibasa, Sk. Ashok Kumar lodged a case stating therein that when he returned to the office after vacation, the peon informed him that three persons who had approached him wanted to meet the Assistant Commissioner to whom he stated that he is not available. Thereafter the peon entertained them and permitted them to sleep in the office of the Assistant Commissioner. However, the peon immediately did find booklets of several forms, such as, Form-C, Form-F and other forms missing from the office.
(3.) On such allegation, case was lodged which was registered as Sadar P.S. case No. 119 of 1991 under Sections 380, 411, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. That matter was investigated upon by the district police but the Investigating Officer did not find any clue of the culprits and thereby submitted final form.;