JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The complainant is in appeal, by special leave,
aggrieved by the order dated May 17, 2007 of the High Court
of Punjab and Haryana whereby the single Judge of that Court
dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition filed by the
appellant and affirmed the order dated February 1, 2002
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon. The
Additional Sessions Judge by his order allowed the Criminal
Revision filed by the present respondent No. 2 and quashed
the order dated June 2, 2001 passed by the Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Gurgaon, summoning him to face
trial under Sections 420, 406 and 161 of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC).
(3.) The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the
complainant') filed a criminal complaint against the
respondent No. 2 in the court of duty Magistrate, Gurgaon.
In his complaint, the complainant stated that he was a
transporter and operating buses on the contract basis in the
name of M/s Chaudhary Bus Service. On May 1, 2000, his two
buses bearing registration Nos. DL-1P-7077 and DL-1PA-3927
were impounded. On that date, the third bus bearing
registration No. DL-1PA-4007 belonging to the complainant
was also impounded. The respondent No. 2 at the relevant
time was working as Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner,
Gurgaon. The complainant visited his office and enquired
about the impounding of his three buses. He was told that he
(complainant) had not paid the passenger taxes in respect of
these three buses. The respondent No. 2 told the complainant
that Rs. 2 Lakhs were due towards the passenger taxes in
relation to these three buses and asked the complainant to
deposit that amount at his residence if he wanted the buses
to be released. The complainant arranged Rs. 1,50,000/- and
paid this amount to respondent No. 2 at his residence at
about 1.45 p.m. on May 1, 2000. The respondent No. 2,
according to the complainant, promised him to issue receipts
from the office. The complainant visited the office of the
accused at about 4 p.m., but there was no one in the office
except one office clerk who told him that two buses have
been released and the third bus would be released on payment
of Rs. 50,000/- at the residence of the respondent No. 2.
The complainant paid Rs. 50,000/- at about 9.30 p.m. at the
residence of the respondent No. 2 and the third bus was also
released. In the complaint, the complainant alleged that the
respondent No. 2 had cheated him and the public money has
been embezzled and the accused also received illegal
gratification; the intention of the respondent No. 2 was
malafide while issuing directions to Inspector posted at
different tax collection points not to accept passengers tax
at tax collection points. It was thus alleged that the
accused had committed offences under Sections 420, 409 and
427 IPC and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.