BIBHUDHENDU PRASAD MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both the aforesaid Criminal Misc. Cases filed by the accused - petitioner arise out of one T.R. Case, being T.R. Case No. 27 of 2008, corresponding to Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No. 43 of 2007 (G.R. Case No. 43 of 2007) pending before the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Cuttack, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) CRLMC No. 1693 of 2008 has been filed by the accusedpetitioner to quash the FIR, upon which, Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No. 43 of 2007 was registered. As during pendency of the said case, a charge sheet has been filed and the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Cuttack in T.R. Case No. 27 of 2008 took cognizance of the offences under section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d)/7 of the P.C. Act against the accused-petitioner, CRLMC No. 33 of 2009 has been filed to quash the said order dated 23.12.2008 taking cognizance of the above offences against the petitioner.

(3.) The short facts involved in both the cases are that one Debadutta Mishra, who happens to be a reporter of the daily Oriya newspaper, "The Dharitri", lodged a report before the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Cuttack regarding a land dispute, inter alia, alleging that he lodged an F.I.R. about the said land dispute before the present petitioner, who was discharging the duty as I.I.C., Jajpur Town Police Station and the said F.I.R. was entered as a Station Diary by the petitioner, but he did not take any action thereon. It was alleged in the said report lodged by Mr. Debadutta Mishra that when he again and again requested the petitioner to take action against the culprits, the petitioner demanded Rs. 3,000/- for taking action. On such information being lodged, the Vigilance police on maintaining proper procedure along with the official witnesses proceeded to Jajpur Police Station, where it was found that the petitioner was in the Government quarters. The complainant and the over hearing witnesses went to the petitioner's quarter and they were asked by the petitioner to sit on the Sofa which was on his verandah and instructed the complainant to follow him to his bed room, where he demanded and accepted the gratification from the complainant. After receipt of the money, he examined the notes and kept the tainted money in his right side Pant pocket. Then the money was immediately recovered from his Pant pocket and his hand was washed with Sodium Carbonate solution when the colour of the solution turned light pink.