SATISH KUMAR MITTAL,J - (1.) PETITIONER Sat Pal Joshi, who was working as District Food and Supplies Controller, Hoshiarpur, in the Department of Food and Supplies, has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of case FIR No. 37 dated 31.5.2002 under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the P.C. Act') registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar, as well as the consequential proceedings along with the order dated 1.11.2004, passed by the Court of Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby charge for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the P.C. Act has been framed.
(2.) WHEN the petitioner was performing the duties of District Food and Supplies Controller, Hoshiarpur, the aforesaid FIR was registered on 31.5.2005 on the basis of the complaint made by one Yash Pal Gupta alleging that the petitioner along with his co-accused Mahesh Chander, who was posted as Inspector in the office of the petitioner, demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 30,000/- from the complainant for dropping notice dated 18.4.2002 under the Bricks Control Order. It was further alleged that the petitioner asked the complaint to pay the amount of bribe to Inspector Mahesh Chander. In the trap laid down by the Vigilance Bureau, co-accused Mahesh Chander accepted the amount on his behalf as also on behalf of the petitioner. Both the accused were arrested on the spot. Subsequently, the staff members of the Food and Supplies Department, Hoshiarpur as well as the petitioner himself made representation to the Government that he was falsely implicated in the aforesaid corruption case by the Vigilance Bureau in connivance with the complainant Yash Pal Gupta, who was having grudge against victim as they under the orders of Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, organized raid on the business premises of Yash Pal Gupta on account of illegal and unauthorised sale of bricks in the Hoshiarpur City. The Principal Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of Food and Supplies got conducted detailed departmental enquiry through Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, who in turn appointed Addl. Deputy Commissioner to conduct the enquiry. According to the petitioner, a detailed enquiry was conducted by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, in which he had examined 13 witnesses and considered the various record and then came to the conclusion that in the aforesaid FIR, the petitioner was falsely implicated as he did not demand or accept any bribe or illegal gratification. It was found that the complainant Yash Pal Gupta in connivance with the Vigilance Department had falsely implicated the petitioner in the case. It is stated in the petition that the said enquiry report was forwarded by Deputy Commissioner to Principal Secretary, Food and Supplies, who in turn forwarded the same to Principal Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of Vigilance for information and necessary action recommending for withdrawal of the case against the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the investigating agency moved the State authorities for obtaining sanction under Section 19 of the P.C. Act for prosecuting the petitioner as well as his co-accused Mahesh Chander. When the said request was pending, the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.8.2002. Vide order dated 21.4.2004, the State Government rejected the proposal for grant of sanction to prosecute the petitioner while observing that the recovery of Rs. 30,000/- from co-accused Mahesh Chander Inspector is doubtful and secondly even if the recovery was fair, then also there is no evidence of any connivance of the petitioner with the concerned Inspector in this case. Subsequently, the investigating agency filed challan in the Court of Special Judge, after receiving sanction to prosecute co- accused Mahesh Chander. Since the petitioner had retired, therefore, challan was also filed qua him as after retirement, no sanction under Section 19 of the P.C. Act was deemed to be necessary. Subsequently, the Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, vide order dated 1.11.2004, framed charge against the petitioner and his co-accused under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the P.C. Act. Now, the petitioner has filed this petition for quashing of the aforesaid FIR as well as the order of charge.
(3.) IN the petition, the petitioner has made the following four submissions in support of his prayer :- (i) The competent authority, by taking conscious decision, had rejected the prayer of the investigating agency for grant of sanction under Section 19 of the P.C. Act. Therefore, prosecution of the petitioner cannot be allowed to proceed merely on the ground that when the challan was filed, the petitioner had already retired and in that situation, the court can take cognizance of the offence without there being any sanction under Section 19 of the P.C. Act. (ii) In addition to the sanction required under Section 19 of the P.C. Act, the sanction under Section 197 of the Code is also required for prosecution of the petitioner, who was a public servant at the time of the alleged occurrence, even though the petitioner ceased to be a public servant on the date of filing of the challan and taking of cognizance of the alleged offence. (iii) The petitioner has been exonerated in detailed departmental enquiry after registration of the impugned FIR. Therefore, criminal proceedings against him deserve to be quashed even after submission of the charge-sheet. (iv) The impugned FIR was registered at the behest of complainant Yash Pal Gupta, who was having a grudge against the petitioner, in connivance with the officials of the Vigilance Department. 4. It has been further stated in the petition that in the departmental enquiry, conducted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, version of the prosecution was found to be false and it was found that the petitioner was falsely implicated at the behest of the complainant. The petitioner was a Gazetted Officer at the relevant time and the investigating agency, without obtaining prior permission, registered criminal case and has, thus, violated circular dated 9.5.1978 (Annexure P-13). Further, the investigating agency, for the reasons best known to it, continued with the enquiry in violation of another circular of the Government dated 11.7.1978 (Annexure P-14), and did not complete the investigation even with the enquiry in violation of another circular of the Government dated 11.7.1978 (Annexure P-14), and did not complete the investigation even within a period of one year. Vide circular dated 4.7.1980 (Annexure P-15), issued by the Government, the investigating agency is required to file challan in the trap cases within a period of six months, but in this case, the investigating agency has acted mala fidely, and in spite of the rejection of sanction under Section 19 of the P.C. Act and recommendation by the Principal Secretary for dropping the proceedings, had filed the challan without there being any material. In view of these submissions, the petitioner prayed for quashing of the FIR as well as the consequential proceedings.;