SRI PARESH CHANDRA NEOG, S/O LATE K.C. NEOG Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Sri Paresh Chandra Neog, S/O Late K.C. Neog
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Click here to view full judgement.
HITESH KUMAR SARMA,J. -
(1.) This criminal revision petition, under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed by Sri Paresh Chandra Neog challenging the legality and validity of the order, dated 7.8.2012, passed by the Court of Special Judge, CBI, Additional Court No. 1, Assam in connection with Special Case No. 1/2011 whereby the petition filed by the petitioner for dropping the proceedings against him for the offences under the Indian Penal Code for want of sanction under section 197 CrPC, 1973 was rejected.
(2.) I have heard Mr. P Kataki, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. SC Keyal, learned Standing Counsel for the CBI. The case of the petitioner may be briefly stated as follows;
(3.) That one Nirmalendu Bhattacharya lodged an FIR with the Officer in Charge, CID Police Station, stating, inter alia, that the pay and allowance of 10th AP Battalion were fraudulently withdrawn to the tune of Rs 18,89,57,335/- much in excess than the actual dues and that the petitioner and the other accused persons were co-conspirator in the alleged excess withdrawals. On completion of investigation, a charge sheet was laid against the petitioner and 7 others for the offences under Section 120B/420/409/477A of Indian Penal Code read with section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner further contends that at the time of consideration of charges, the petitioner filed a petition for dropping the proceedings under Sections 120B/409/420/477A of Indian Penal Code for want of sanction under section 197 CrPC, 1973. The petitioner further contends that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate that in the decisions of Harihar Prasad v. State of Bihar, reported in (1972) 3 SCC 89, Ramesh Lal Jain v. Nagendra Singh, reported in (2006) 1 SCC 294 and Rakesh Mishra v. State of Bihar, reported in (2006) 1 SCC 557, it has been laid down that if on facts it is prima facie found that act or omission for which the accused was charged had a reasonable connection with the discharge of his duties and then it must be held to be an official act to which applicability of section 197 CrPC, 1973 cannot be disputed. The petitioner also contended that he had made vicariously liable for acts of others, and therefore, sanction under section 197 CrPC, 1973 is required to prosecute him.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.