J.S.SEKHON, J. - (1.) THROUGH this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sarvshri Surinder Singh Arora and Malkiat Singh Parihar seek the quashment of FIR No. 104 of 1979, registered at Police Station Sub Division No. 6, Jalandhar, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409, 471-A read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, as well as the resultant proceedings therefrom. During the pendency of this petition, Shri Surinder Singh Arora (petitioner) died. Therefore, vide order dated July 30, 1992, this Court ordered that this petition has become infructuous as all the criminal proceedings pending against him had already abated on his death. Now this petition survives on behalf of Sh. Malkiat Singh Parihar petitioner only.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case figuring in the FIR (copy Annexure P-1) are that Sh. Surinder Singh Arora, while working as Executive Engineer (Civil) at Civil Works Division, Punjab State Electricity Board, Jalandhar, in connivance with other co-accused, including Sh. Malkiat Singh Parihar petitioner, during the span of 1-1/2 month from 1.4.1978 to 15.5.1978 purchased goods worth Rs. 8,38,569.04 and made payments to the contractors for supplying the material. Out of this material, some material was sub-standard, some of it was not even required and the supply of sometimes was imputed to some contractors, who have not even supplied such articles and that the material was purchased on a very high price. List of the articles of inferior quality purchased from different contractors was also given in the FIR. Thus, it is maintained that all these persons had connived themselves for causing wrongful gain to themselves and loss to the Board. Taking this information reliable, the case for the above referred offences was registered against the petitioners and others by Shri Balwant Singh, D.S.P. Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, Jalandhar on 26.4.1979. After completion of the investigation, challan was submitted in the court on 6.1.1990 i.e. after a lapse of 11 years, the trial Court is yet to frame the charge, when the petitioners approached this Court through this petition for quashment of the FIR and the resultant proceedings therefrom. The petitioner contends that this unexplained delay of 11 years in filing the charge-sheet after registration of the case had resulted in depriving him of his fundamental right to speedy trial and justice enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is also maintained that due to this inordinate delay, the petitioner is prejudiced in setting up a proper defence.
(3.) IN the return filed by Shri Shangara Singh Inspector, Vigilance Bureau Punjab, Jalandhar, it is maintained that the petitioner along with eighteen other co-accused is involved in the same case and after protracted investigation, nine challans were prepared against the petitioner and eighteen other persons. The delay in concluding the investigation was explained in para 5 of the return as under : "Para No. 5 of the petition is wrong and is denied. It is submitted that the petitioners along with other co-accused purchased various kinds of goods from various contractors by preparing bogus bills and preparing bogus record in higher rates. The goods were purchased approximately to the tune of Rs. 8,38,569.04 during the month 1.4.78 to 15.5.78 and Rs. 1,10,000/- during the year 1977-78. The investigating agency was to collect all the bills and other records from the department of the petitioners and the concerned firms. During investigation the department of the petitioners did not co-operate with the investigating agency. The goods were purchased from various contractors on higher rates. During the investigation all the bills were collected and the statements of various persons/officials were recorded. The investigation was done by about eight Inspectors and two D.S.Ps. at different stages and time. The above investigating officers were also entrusted with other enquiries and cases. Moreover, on 14.5.1979 after registration of the case all the accused got confirmed interim/anticipatory bails from the Court of Sh. R.L. Randev, Special Judge, Jalandhar, but five accused, namely, Bakshish Singh, Harbhajan Singh, Janak Raj, Om Parkash and M.M. Malhotra did not join the investigation and their whereabouts were not known. Therefore, in the year 1985 one challan was prepared and the objections were got complied with. Ultimately, on 19.9.88 nine separate challans were prepared. After the completion of investigation, nine challans were prepared and in all the challans both the petitioners are main accused and in all the challans total 195 witnesses were examined under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The investigation was very lengthy, which took time in finalising the challans. Moreover, the accused-petitioners and other-co-accused were transferred to various stations during the investigation. One of the accused, namely, Janak Raj was got declared proclaimed offender during the course of investigation. This fact took considerable time in completing the investigation. All the accused could not be present in the Court, when the challan was to be put in the Court. This fact also took at least six months. At this stage also, three of the accused are yet to be produced in the Court. The delay was not caused by the investigating agency knowingly but it was due to unavoidable circumstances and due to lengthy investigation. The delay in the case was due to delaying and dilatory tactics adopted by the accused. The grounds mentioned in this para are wrong and denied. The evidence in this case in hand is mostly documentary. The witnesses are to depose in Court on the basis of documentary evidence." ;