TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1664
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in Cr. M.P. No.3796 of 2018 whereby, exercising powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 CrPC, the High Court quashed the order dated 20.02.2020, by which cognizance was taken, and all further proceedings in connection with Case No.78 of 2016, registered at P.S. Sakchi, corresponding to G.R. No.1627 of 2016, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate CJM, Jamshedpur. Factual Matrix 3. The appellant (original complainant) filed an application, under Section 156(3) CrPC, alleging that the second and third respondents (original accused) offered to take appellant's Truck (Trailor No.NL 01K 1250) on a monthly rent of Rs.33,000, exclusive of driver's/helper's salary, for plying it between Tata Steel Jamshedpur an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Truck were not provided, therefore, no agreement was executed; and even if it is taken that agreement was executed, no offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC is made out. 8. While the application under Section 482 CrPC was pending before the High Court, on a police report, cognizance was taken by CJM on 20.02.2020 and processes were issued under Section 204 CrPC. Consequently, respondent nos. 2 and 3 (original accused) sought amendment in their prayer before the High Court so as to include the prayer to quash the cognizance order. 9. The High Court vide impugned order quashed the order of cognizance and all further proceedings in the case concerned while leaving it open to the original complainant to take recourse to civil re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cused in violation of the agreement, thereby disclosing commission of an offence of criminal breach of trust. Submissions on behalf of Accused-respondents 14. On behalf of accused respondent(s), it was submitted: a. The FIR did not disclose commission of any offence, therefore the High Court was justified in quashing the entire proceeding. b. There was no specific allegation in the FIR regarding disposal or misappropriation of the Truck, hence no case of criminal breach of trust was made out. c. The offence of cheating is not made out inasmuch as dishonest intention from the very beginning is not disclosed by the averments in the FIR. d. The High Court was justified in quashing the cognizance order and further proceedings. Submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....est intention on the part of the accused, is made out which may require investigation. In such circumstances, if the FIR is quashed at the very inception, it would be nothing short of an act which thwarts a legitimate investigation. 18. It is trite law that FIR is not an encyclopedia of all imputations. Therefore, to test whether an FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence what is to be looked at is not any omission in the accusations but the gravamen of the accusations contained therein to find out whether, prima facie, some cognizable offence has been committed or not. At this stage, the Court is not required to ascertain as to which specific offence has been committed. It is only after investigation, at the time of framing charg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....had been dishonestly disposed of by the accused, it may make out a case of criminal breach of trust. Therefore, there was no justification to quash the FIR at the threshold without looking into the materials collected during the course of the investigation. 21. In our view, the High Court ought to have considered the materials collected during investigation before taking a call on the prayer for quashing the FIR, the cognizance order and the proceedings in pursuance thereof. 22. To peruse the police report and to understand as to what type of investigation was carried out by the police, on 19.07.2024 we required the State to place the charge-sheet on record. However, unfortunately, though the State filed its affidavit, the charge-sheet wa....