- (1.) K. Jayachandra Reddy, J.-This appeal by Union of India and Delhi Special Police Establishment, Chandigarh Branch and its two officials is filed against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing a petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C., filed by Shri B. R. Bajaj, IAS. Finance Secretary, Union Territory of Chandigarh, who figured as an accused in the F.I.R. registered against him and some others. The appeal arises under the following circumstances.
(2.) IN the Union Territory of Chandigarh, a Unit of INdian Council of Child Welfare (hereinafter referred to as the "Council"), a registered Society was established. Shri B. R. Bajaj, respondent No. 1 being the Finance Secretary was the Ex-officio Vice-president of the said Council. Shri K. Banerjee, the Chief Commissioner of the Union Territory was the President of the said Council. On 23.4.1985 the Council sought permission of the Union Territory to run a lottery in order to raise funds for opening a rehabilitation centre for handicapped children and the Union Territory granted permission to the Council by its letter dated 10.7.1985. The funds thus raised were meant to be used for the welfare of the handicapped children. The Government of INdia, Ministry of Home Affairs issued guidelines on the running of lotteries to all the State Governments including the Union Territory of Chandigarh. As per the guidelines the maximum number of bumper draws in a year can be 12 and the minimum revenue accruing from the lottery can be atleast 15% of the gross value of the tickets printed for sale. During the second week of August, 1985, advertisements were given by the Council in the Tribune, Indian Express and other newspapers inviting tenders for running the said lottery. As per this advertisement the prescribed form which also contained the terms and conditions of the tender could be obtained from the Secretary, Bal Bhawan, Chandigarh on payment of Rs. 20/-. The terms and conditions indicated that tenders were invited in respect of 156 draws covering a period of three years namely 52 draws per year. For ensuring that the payments were made regularly by the tenderer whose tender is ultimately accepted, securities were to be furnished as per Condition Nos.8 and 9 which lay down that the organiser should deposit Rs. 5 lacs as security in a nationalised bank duly pledged in the name of the Council and also a Bank guarantee of the equal amount of security which shall be forfeited in full or in part at the discretion of the Council in case a breach of any of the terms and conditions of the agreement ; and that the organiser shall pay a net guaranteed profit to the Council for the three contractual years in 12 equal instalments and each Instalment would be payable before the printing of the tickets is ordered for a draw and if the organiser fails to pay any instalment during the stipulated period, he shall be liable to pay interest @ 12% P.A. for each day of default. Eight parties submitted their fenders. The Tender Committee of the Council opened the tenders on 29.8.85 and sent their recommendations to Shri B. R Bajaj, Finance Secretary. The Tender Committee in its note recommended that the tender of M/s. V. Kumar Lotterywala who was the second highest tenderer should be accepted since the first highest tenderer had withdrawn his offer before the Committee took up the tenders for consideration. The file remained with Shri B. R. Bajaj and he accepted the recommendations of the.' Tender Committee on 23.9.85 and marked the file to the President of the Council. On 21.10.85 Shri Bajaj recorded a note purported to have been made after discussion with the President, stating that he was informed that M/s. V. Kumar Lotterywala was not a reliable and suitable party and that the next highest tenderer M/s. Swastik Distributor had withdrawn and M/s. Om Prakash & Co. is the next highest tenderer who has been running a lottery currently and therefore the contract may be finalised with M/s. Om Prakash & Co. The file was marked to the President who approved the proposal of the Vice-President Shri B. R. Bajaj. The file went to the Council and reached there on 29.10.85. In the meanwhile M/s. Jasmine & Co., one of the tenderers who offered a lower quotation also withdrew and M/s. Om Prakash & Co. whom the contract was ordered to be given, also withdrew on the ground that due to inordinate delay in deciding the issue they were no longer in a position to organize the lottery. In the circumstances the Committee recommended to offer the lottery to the next highest tenderer M/s. H. K. Chugh & Co. Thereafter a note was made by Shri B. R. Bajaj to the effect that he had discussed the matter with the President and he had approved the proposal and thus the contract of lottery came to be ordered to be awarded to M/s. H. K. Chughi & Co. The officers of the Delhi Special Police Establishment, Chandigarh gathered' information that M/s. Om Prakash &. Co., M/s. Jasmine & Co. and M/s. H. K. Chugh & Co. are all sister concerns and that Shri H. K. Chugh is also a partner in the firm M/s. Om Prakash & Co. and that Shri Om Prakash is also a partner in the firm M/s. Jasmine & Co. and Shri H. K. Chugh is no other than the son of Shri Om Prakash and that the accused persons entered into a conspiracy with a view to causing undue pecuniary benefit to themselves including private parties namely M/s. Om Prakash & Co. and its sister concerns, and corresponding loss to the Council and that Shri B. R. Bajaj with this object in view recorded a false note on 21.10.85 inter alia to the effect that on verification from the Director, State Lotteries, Punjab, he was informed that M/s. V. Kumar Lotterywala was not a reliable and suitable party and that in fact no such enquiries were made and that the Director of State Lotteries had no complaints against M/s. V. Kumar Lotterywala, the highest tenderer and that this false note was therefore recorded by Shri B. R Bajaj with a view to ensure that the higher offer of M/s. V. Kumar Lotterywala could be rejected and that in the process of this conspiracy delaying tactics were adopted at various levels resulting in the withdrawal of next highest tenderer M/s. Swastik Distributor. Having ensured this withdrawal, Shri B. P. Bajaj made an order for the award of the contract to M/s. Om Prakash & Co. On the basis of this information further investigation was- carried on and an F.I.R. was registered against Shri B. R. Bajaj. M/s. Om Prakash & Co., M/s. Jasmine & Co., M/s. H. K. Chugh & Co. and sortie unknown persons. In that F.I.R. all these details including the other omissions and commissions committed by the accused persons were mentioned and that they committed offences punishable under Section 120B read with Sections 418 and 468, IPC and Section 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. On the basis of this F.I.R the case was registered against the accused persons and the same was entrusted to the DSP.. CBI. Chandigarh for investigation. When the investigation was still in progress, Shri B. R. Bajaj filed a petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. in the High Court against Union of India and others with a prayer for the quashing of the F.I.R: registered against him and others. The High Court by the impugned order quashed the same by a very lengthy order in so far as Shri B. R. Bajaj is concerned, holding inter alia (hat the allegations in the F.I.R. do not make out an offence against the petitioner.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the Union of India submitted that the High Court has erred in quashing the F.I.R on the ground that the F.I.R and other materials do not disclose any offence on the basis of some records produced for the first time by Shri B. R. Bajaj and the Union Territory of Chandigarh and that the High Court erred in relying upon the affidavit of Shri K. Banerjee and the letter of Mrs. Shant Bhupinder Singh, Director, State Lotteries Punjab. It is also his submission that cognizable offences are clearly made out which need to be further investigated and in support of this submission he relied on several documents which are yet to be examined during the investigation. Learned counsel for the respondent Shri B. R. Bajaj, on the other hand, submitted that the High Court has power under Section 482, Cr. P.C. to interfere with an investigation and to stop the same to prevent any kind of uncalled for unnecessary harassment to any individual and that the contents of the F.I.R. do not disclose any offence and that Shri B. R. Bajaj has not committed any culpable act attracting any penal consequences.;