Abdul Kadir vs. The State Of Assam And Anr.

Held

The Court held that there appeared to be no justified ground to invoke the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court considered the magnitude of the alleged offense, which involved evading payment of taxes to the government by smuggling coal, deeming it an offense against society. It found that the documents submitted by the petitioner did not substantiate his averments. The Court also noted that it could decipher no malaise or malice by the investigation agency. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Som Mittal Vs. Government of Karnataka, the Court reiterated that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, only to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice, and not to embark on an inquiry into the reliability or genuineness of allegations in the FIR. Therefore, the criminal petition was disposed of without quashing the FIR.

Facts

The petitioner, Abdul Kadir, filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash an FIR registered under Sections 120(B)/379/420 of the IPC. The FIR alleged that trucks loaded with coal were intercepted at a checkpoint, and their drivers failed to produce valid documents for the transportation of coal. The prosecution contended that this constituted theft and evasion of government revenue. The petitioner claimed to be a businessman who purchased coal legally from Meghalaya and transported it to Bihar, possessing valid tax invoices and e-way bills. He alleged that the police seized his cash and a cheque, assaulted him, and destroyed his documents. The investigation report indicated that while some documents were submitted, an examination of e-way bills by the Superintendent of Taxes revealed discrepancies, with invoices allegedly issued by the dealer himself and not by any office. The report also noted that no single e-way bill matched a specific registration number.

Key Issues

1. Whether the FIR registered under Sections 120(B)/379/420 of the IPC against the petitioner for alleged evasion of taxes on coal transportation should be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that no offense was committed as he possessed all requisite documents, including GST tax invoices and e-way bills, for the coal purchased and transported. He contended that the FIR was foisted upon him and that the investigation agency acted with malice, citing alleged assault and destruction of documents. He relied on his business certificate and applications for purchasing coal as evidence of legitimate trade. Respondents' arguments: The State argued that the incident involved multiple trucks and other accused persons, not just the petitioner. They pointed out that the application to purchase coal was not receipted by the ACP and that the FIR filed with the DGP was a computer-typed copy without a receipt. The State also highlighted the findings of the Superintendent of Taxes regarding the e-way bills, suggesting irregularities in the documentation.