( 2025:JHHC:24551 ) 1 Cr. M.P. No.129 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.129 of 2025 ------ 1. Raj Kumar Yadav, aged about 30 yrs, S/o Teja Yadav, R/o Akash Kinare Jarlahi, Akashkanali, P.O., P.S. & District-Dhanbad. 2. Deepak Kumar Rai, aged about 24 yrs, S/o Ram Chandra Rai, r/o Loco Bazar, Gomoh, Hariharpur, P.O.-Gomoh, P.S.-Topchanchi, Dist.-Dhanbad. 3. Naresh Paswan, aged about 60 yrs., S/o Mauji Paswan, R/o Vill- Kachna, P.O. & P.S.-Pakribarawan, Dist.-Nawada (Bihar). 4. Arvind Kumar Singh, aged about 62 yrs. S/o Ramakant Singh, R/o Dharmabandh, P.O.-Madhuban, P.S.-Malkera, Dist.- Dhanbad. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with a prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.265 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.372 of 2024 involving the offences punishable under Sections 379, 411, 413, 414, 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with Rule 13 of the Jharkhand Mineral (Prevention ( 2025:JHHC:24551 ) 2 Cr. M.P. No.129 of 2025 of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 (JMPIMTS) and the said case is now pending before the learned J.M-1st Class, Dhanbad. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner no.1 and 2 are respectively the driver and owner of the truck bearing registration no.JH-09-Y-2643 and the petitioner no.3 and 4 are respectively the driver and owner of the truck bearing registration no.JH-10-AF-1509 and the allegation against the petitioners is that the trucks of the petitioners loaded with the coal, which was to be transported at the behest of the co-accused Sudhir Kumar Goyal and Ramesh Kumar Agrawal but instead of transporting the coal to the hard coke factory of Sudhir Kumar Goyal and Ramesh Kumar Agrawal in the name and style of M/s Tirumala Balaji Hard Coke Industries Rukni, Purulia, West Bengal in fact were taking the hard coke to the brick kiln of Shree Ram Hard Coke and Allied Industries and the said coke was found in the premises of the Shree Ram Hard Coke and Allied Industries. Police after investigation of the case submitted charge-sheet alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 418/120B of the Indian Penal Code vide order dated 30.01.2024 in connection with the aforesaid case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the co- ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Cr.M.P. No.49 of 2008 dated 02.04.2009, wherein, in a similar case, the co-ordinate Bench held that the allegations made in the First Information Report do not constitute the offence and therefore, the proceeding against the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the judgment ( 2025:JHHC:24551 ) 3 Cr. M.P. No.129 of 2025 of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Agrawal vs. The State of Jharkhand & Another passed in Cr.M.P. No.1628 of 2013 dated 20.07.2016, wherein it was observed by the coordinate bench that the deviation by the truck carrying coal to a place other than its destination would not constitute any offence, hence, in that case the entire criminal proceeding was quashed. The same effect is the case of Dhiraj Kumar Swarnkar vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. (Cr) No.382 of 2015 dated 11.11.2016 as also in the case of Manendra Kumar Singh @ Muna Kumar Singh vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. (Cr.) No.483 of 2015 dated 30.08.2017 wherein the co-ordinate Bench relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Abhas Kumar Acksaria & Others Vs. The State of Bihar & Others (Cr.W.J.C. No.33 of 1991[R]), wherein the Division Bench of this Court has held that “deviation” by a truck carrying coal to a place other than its destination cannot be a criminal offence either under the Indian Penal Code or under the Essential Commodities Act. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.265 of 2021 which is now pending before the learned J.M-1st Class, Dhanbad, be quashed and set aside. 5. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.265 of 2021 which is now pending before the learned J.M-1st Class, Dhanbad and submits that since the petitioners were under the obligation to take the coal to their factory at Purulia only, hence, taking the coal to the factory at Shree Ram Hard Coke and Allied ( 2025:JHHC:24551 ) 4 Cr. M.P. No.129 of 2025 Industries, is sufficient to constitute the offence punishable under Section 418 of Indian Penal Code. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that in order to constitute the offence punishable under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code the essential ingredients are:- (i) accused cheated a person (ii) at the time of offence committed the accused was bound by law or legal contract to protect the interest of the person whom he cheated (iii) the obligation related to transaction involving cheating (iv) accused had the knowledge that his act was likely to cause wrongful loss to the person cheated and whose interest he was bound to protect. 7. It is a settled principle of law that mens rea is one of the essential ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd. vs. Biological E. Ltd. & Others reported in (2000) 3 SCC 269. 8. Now, coming to the facts of the case, there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioners of cheating as they are not alleged to have dishonestly induced anybody to part with any property nor is there other ingredient of Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code alleged to have been committed by the petitioners. 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that even if the entire allegations against the petitioners in the complaint, case-diary and ( 2025:JHHC:24551 ) 5 Cr. M.P. No.129 of 2025 the charge-sheet are considered to be true in their entirety still the offence punishable under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioners. Hence, the continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioners will amount to abuse of process of law. 10. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No.265 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No.372 of 2024 which is now pending before the learned J.M-1st Class, Dhanbad, as prayed for by the petitioners, is quashed and set aside. 11. In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 20th of August, 2025 AFR/ Abhiraj