Crl. Misc. No. M-4806 of 2010 v. State of Punjab

In response, learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Dharambir, Police Station Moonak submits that the car (Verna) which is mentioned in the FIR had a fake number plate. The Skoda car belongs to M/s JMK Ispat Pvt. Ltd. which belongs to petitioner No.1. It is further submitted that M/s Surendra Steel Supply Company, Railway Road, Jakhal of which the petitioner claims himself to be a proprietor is a fake firm and there is no such firm by the name of Surendra Steel Supply Company. The invoices prepared of the said firm are also fake. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint made by Surjit Singh, Excise and Taxation Officer, Mobile Wing, Patiala, which is addressed to the Officer Incharge of PS Moonak. The allegations in the complaint are of interference in the discharge of official duty of a public servant and of taking away the material that had been confiscated by the Crl. Misc. No. M-4806 of 2010 [3] patrolling party of the Excise and Taxation Department. The complainant on

13.12.2009 along with his staff was patrolling in the area between Lehra and Moonak. He received an information there that two vehicles loaded with iron and fake documents and without clearance from the ICC at Chular Kalan were coming from Mandi Gobindgarh and proceeding to Haryana. The complainant set up a check post near the ICC Chular. At about 8.20 a.m. both the vehicles (trucks) were seen coming. The number of one of the truck was PB 23G 5637 and of the other truck, only the last number 0925 could be read. They were signalled to stop and both the vehicles were found to be loaded with iron. Truck No. PB 23G 5637 was checked after stopping. However, the driver of the other truck successfully fled away. On checking the truck No. PB 23G 5637, inquiries were made regarding payment of tax to the Punjab government because there was no information given at the ICC and even the papers were fake. The complainant along with his staff apprehended the truck and was taking it to PS Moonak for handing it to the Police. When the patrolling party along with the truck that had been apprehended reached Jakhal Mandi then from the rear side, two vehicles, one of them a Verna Car No. PB 39 4444 and the other a Skoda car greyish- black in colour, the number of which was not known, came behind them. These vehicles after over taking, stopped the patrolling party and out of them 8-10 persons came in front of the patrolling party and started hurling brick bats and stones. The patrolling party in order to save themselves, were parking its vehicle on one side. Then in the meanwhile, the truck driver – Gurjit Singh (petitioner-2) on the instigation of the assailants, fled away from the spot with the truck that had been apprehended. However, the Driving Licence and three mobile telephone bills (Nokia) which were Crl. Misc. No. M-4806 of 2010 [4] recovered and papers of the vehicle had remained with the complainant and were enclosed with the application for lodging the FIR. The same were accordingly handed over to the Incharge of the Police Station. Out of these persons, the name of one of the persons came to be known as Surinder Kumar @ Lambu, resident of Gobindgarh, who was the owner of the goods. He had suddenly attacked and had forcibly taken away the truck that was loaded with iron and had attacked them with an intention to kill them. Besides, had interfered in the discharge of public duty of the officer. They had saved themselves from the place of the occurrence and reached Police Station Moonak. In this entire occurrence, there was connivance of Surinder Kumar @ Lambu, resident of Gobindgarh. Against him and against the other involved, strict legal action was liable to be taken. The names of the members of the patrolling party who were with the complainant, were mentioned. The persons had entered into a skirmish with the patrolling party and, therefore, strict action was liable to be taken. Surinder Kumar Gupta (petitioner-1) has been specifically mentioned in the FIR as the person who was the owner of the truck and was transporting iron and steel from Mandi Gobindgarh to Haryana State without payment of necessary tax to the State. In this manner, he was evading tax. When the trucks carrying the goods were apprehended, one of the trucks fled away at that time. The other truck while it was being taken to the Police Station, Moonak, was attacked by Surinder Kumar Gupta (petitioner-1) along with 8-10 persons. The complainant has specifically mentioned that the entire incident had occurred in connivance with petitioner-1. During investigations so far carried out it has been brought out that the Verna Car which is mentioned in the FIR as bearing No. PB 39 4444 in fact had a fake number plate. The Skoda car, it has transpired during Crl. Misc. No. M-4806 of 2010 [5] investigation, belongs to M/s JMC Ispat Pvt Ltd, which firm is that of Surinder Kumar Gupta (petitioner-1). During investigation, it has also transpired that M/s Surindera Steel Company, Railway Road, Jakhal, which is the address given of petitioner-1 in the memo of parties, in fact does not exist. Petitioner-1 claims himself to be a proprietor of the said firm – M/s Surindera Steel Company. It has also transpired that the invoices prepared of the said firm were fake. It may be noticed that even though Gurjit singh – petitioner-2 had fled away with truck No.PB 23G 5637, the papers which were handed over to the complainant, had remained with him and these were handed over to the Incharge of Police Station, Moonak. Therefore, it cannot be said that the papers of the vehicle and of the mobile phone, which were taken in possession by the complainant, have been otherwise obtained by him. These were indeed taken in possession during the checking. The manner in which the incident had occurred is quite serious inasmuch as the petitioner-1 not only was evading tax but also attacked the public servants and in the process was successful in letting Gurjit Singh – petitioner-2, driver of the truck that had been apprehended by the patrolling party, to get away along with the truck. The said acts are the such where an attempt had been made by petitioner-1 to prevent and deter public servants in the lawful discharge of their official duties as a public servants. The contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners regarding delivery of the consignment are to be gone into by the investigating authorities. In order to know and ascertain the other tax evasions, fake firms and other unlawful activities that may be indulged in by petitioner No.1, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners would be necessary. The custodial interrogation, as held in State represented by CBI v. Anil Sharma 1997 (4) RCR (Cr) 268 (SC), is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than Crl. Misc. No. M-4806 of 2010 [6] questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 CrPC. Even otherwise, the exercise of power to grant pre-arrest bail is somewhat extra-ordinary in character. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, in order to bring out more and useful information, the custody of both the petitioners is required by the investigating authorities to ascertain regarding the other activities of petitioner-1. Besides, petitioner-2, being the driver of petitioner-1, could also give out necessary and useful information, which would be helpful for the investigation. In view of the above, no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out. Consequently, this petition is dismissed. February 26, 2010 (S.S. SARON) JUDGE