HARMOHAN KALITA AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
Court: Gauhati High Court
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
Judgment date:
Case summary
Gauhati High Court judgment dated 2020-12-02. HARMOHAN KALITA AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Page No. # 1/3 GAHC010014042020 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl. Pet. /47/2020 HARMOHAN KALITA AND ANR. S/O- LATE ADIT CH DEKA, R/O- VILL NATUNGAON, P. O AND P. S- JAGIROAD, DIST- MORIGAON, , ASSAM, PIN- 782410 2: NARAYAN PRASAD SHARMA S/O- LATE KHUMANANDA SHARMA R/O- VILL- NATUNGAON P. O AND P. S- JAGIROAD DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 78241 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:PRAVHAT CHANDRA SAIKIA S/O- SRI JUNARAM SAIKIA ASSTT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD (BUILDING) MORIGAON SUB DIVISION DIST AND P. O- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782410 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI Page No. # 2/3 ORDER Date : 02-12-2020 Heard Mr. B. K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. P. P. , Assam for the respondent No. 1, as well as Mr. A. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
By this petition under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner prays for quashing the proceeding in GR Case No. 1450/2019 arising out of Jagiroad P. S. Case No. 284/2019 under Section 420/406 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was entrusted with a contract for construction of a classroom and supplying furniture. The classroom was constructed and the furniture were also supplied. However, having found defect in the furniture, the then Principal refused to accept the furniture and as such, the petitioner took back the same, and later on he again supplied the furniture to the school. However, in the meantime, the FIR was lodged and as such, the then Principal was reluctant to take delivery of the furniture in view pendency of the criminal proceeding before the court. Learned counsel further submits that as the Principal did not take delivery of the furniture the bill was also not paid.
The informant has also filed an affidavit supporting the contention of the petitioner that the contractor (petitioner) subsequently supplied the furniture, but the Principal did not accept the same because of pendency of the case as in the meantime, the FIR was lodged without verifying the real state of affairs. The allegation made in the FIR was that the petitioner did not supply the furniture and misappropriated the money. It is also admitted that no payment was made and as such, there was no question of misappropriation by the petitioner/contractor. In view of the above fact situation and the admission of the informant himself, it is apparent that the FIR was lodged due to mis-information and the allegation made in the FIR was admittedly not correct as is evident from the affidavit of the informant. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this court is of the view that allowing this criminal proceeding to continue would not serve any cause of justice, Page No.
# 3/3 inasmuch as, from the stand taken by the informant, it is apparent that possibility of the proceeding culminating in conviction of the petitioner is very very bleak. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceeding in the present case would unnecessarily put the petitioner in hardship and oppression, which may amount to abuse of process of the court and as such, the proceeding deserves to be quashed for ends of justice. Accordingly, the proceeding in GR Case No. 1450/2019 arising out of Jagiroad P. S. Case No. 284/2019 under Section 420/406 IPC pending in the court of the learned CJM, Morigaon and any other proceeding incidental thereto is hereby quashed. The criminal petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Source: Gauhati High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.