In Criminal Appeal No. 3512 of 2023 -SC- Supreme Court quashes FIR in fuel adulteration case citing prosecution's failure to provide expert report
Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Pankaj Mithal [24-11-2023]

Read Order: Suresh & Ors V. State of Madhya Pradesh

Chahat Varma

New Delhi, November 28, 2023: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has quashed an FIR registered against three individuals, accused of fuel adulteration, due to a lack of substantial evidence and the prosecution's failure to produce an expert report on the nature of the liquid in question.

In the case at hand, the appellants had sought the quashing of an FIR registered against them under Sections 420 and 120­B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. They invoked the jurisdiction of the Madhya Pradesh High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, however, the High Court, through the impugned judgment, dismissed the petition for quashing the FIR.

The case originated from events on October 7, 2021, when Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) issued invoices for the transportation of 9 Kilolitres each of petrol and diesel to MP Bombay Auto Service Petrol Diesel Pump. Allegedly, due to valve failure, the fuel was transferred to another tanker. On October 11, 2021, the police intercepted the truck while unloading at the pump, seizing the liquid. Samples were sent to various laboratories, and on October 14, 2021, an FIR was registered. The appellants received arrest memos on October 13, 2021. The BPCL Quality Assurance Laboratory submitted a test report, stating conformity with specifications and thereafter, a show cause notice under Section 6(b) of the Essential Commodities Act was issued to the third appellant, resulting in a fine.

The prosecution's case was based on the allegation that a hydrocarbon mixture, resembling petrol and diesel, was found in a seized tanker and was being sold by the appellants as genuine fuel. However, the division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal noted that despite the passage of more than two years since the samples were sent for testing, no expert report on the nature of the liquid in the tanker had been produced.

The bench also highlighted the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the nature of the liquid found in the seized tanker. It was noted that no material forming part of the charge sheet had been presented to demonstrate that the liquid in the tanker was neither diesel nor petrol, but a mixture of hydrocarbons. The absence of such substantive evidence raised doubts about the validity of the allegations and the basis for the charges.

“The allegation of cheating is also made on the footing that thousands of customers were supplied with the said mixture instead of petrol or diesel. Unless there was a material forming part of the charge­sheet to show the nature of the liquid, no offence is made out,” said the division bench.

Further, the bench pointed out that the prosecution’s lack of effort to obtain the report even after being notified by the court, led to an adverse inference being drawn against them.

Thus, considering the absence of substantiated evidence and the extended delay in obtaining expert reports, the Court concluded that the continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

As a result, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and quashed the FIR and charge sheet.