N. C. KOCHHAR, J. - (1.) BOTH the petitioners have been employed as Deputy Superintendent in the Central Jail Jaipur. They have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the case registered vide FIR No. 87 dated 27. 9. 88 with the Police Station of Anti-Corruption Department of Rajasthan Government at Jaipur. According to the copy of the FIR filed by the petitioners, the case was registered on the report of Manglesh Jain, Ex convict of Central Jail, Jaipur. According to Manglesh Jain, on 19. 9. 88 he had received a telephone call, informing him that convict Prem, who was undergoing sentence in the jail and who was his friend, wanted to meet him and as such, he reached the Central Jail between 4 and 4. 30 p. m. on 20. 09. 1988. There Prem had told him that both the Deputy Superintendents used to harass him and used to tell him that if he arranged to pay them Rs. 5000/- he would not be harassed and would be given all the facilities in jail and, thereafter, he after talking to Prem, had settled the deal of paying a sum of Rs. 1000/- to each of the two petitioners by way of bribe. He, however, asked the police to arrange for a raid and, consequently, the raid was arranged. The amount could not be paid to the petitioners in the jail premises, but the complainant took the money and trap party to the house of petitioner No. 1 Om Prakash Gupta and entered his house and after some time, on receipt of signal, the raid parly went to the premises where Manglesh Jain informed the police party that under the direction of the petitioner No. 1, he had kept the notes in question, which were treated with the chemical powder, under the pillow cover of the bed lying in drawing room of the house of petitioner No. 1 and that at time, the petitioner No. 2 was also present in the house. The police party is stated to have conducted the test on the hands of the petitioners as also the mother and wife of petitioner No. 1, who were also present in the house, besides conducting the test on the pillow cover and the bed sheet lying on the bed. According to the police proceedings, the notes were found lying under the document in side the house of petitioner No. 1.
(2.) IN this petition the petitioners have alleged that they used to oppose Shri Chetan Dev, who was the Superintendent of Jail and who used to violate the directions issued in the Jail Manual. It has been alleged that Chetan Dev tried to get rid of them by getting illegally transferred but since he did not succeed, he got a false case registered against them with the help of a convict, who was undergoing sentence in the jail and with the aid of an Ex-convict. It has been alleged that the investigation conducted by the police did not show that any case had been made out and further that the action against them is malafide, The matter came up before G. K. Sharma, J. on 17. 7. 89, when the Public Prosecutor was directed to call the case diary alongwith the I. O. and two weeks' time was granted for that purpose. Thereafter, many opportunities were granted to the prosecution to produce the I. O. alongwith the case diary and last opportunity was granted on 5. 1. 90. INspite of all these opportunities, neither the I. O. has appeared, nor the case diary has been produced and no explanation is coming forward as to why the order regarding production of the case diary and I. O. could not be complied with. The learned Public Prosecutor has only submitted that he had sent the letters and reminders to the authorities, but he has not been able to get the I. O. and/or the case diary. Even according to the police proceedings, the copy of which is found attached with the copy of FIR produced by the petitioners, the chemical test did not show positive result either when it was applied to the hands of the petitioners or when it was applied to the hands of the other persons present in the house of petitioner No. 1 at the relevant time. The chemical examination did not even show positive result on the bed and pillow cover, where the amount of Rs. 2000/- was stated to have been kept by way of bribe adverse inference has to be drawn against the prosecution for non-production of the case diary and non-appearance of the I. O. inspite of the various opportunities and without any explanation. The prosecution is thus, unable to rebut the contention of the petiti-oners that the prosecution has failed to collect any evidence to show that either the petitioners had demanded bribe from the complainant or any amount was given by the complainant to either of them by way of bribe and that they have been falsely implicated. Before parting with this order, it may be necessary to emphasis that there is no doubt that the public servants are supposed to act honestly while discharging their duties and if they act dishonestly, strict action must be taken against them, but another important factor has to be kept in mind and that is that no public servant can be falsely implicated or persecuted either by his superiors or by the police and the investigation agency is bound to act fairly. In this case, not only the prosecution has failed to act fairly with the petitioners, but has also shown discourtesy by not appearing in Court. A copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police for taking necessary action against the Officers responsible for not complying with the order regarding production of the case diary and the appearance of the I. O. In the result, I allow this petition quash the FIR bearing No. 87/88 registered with the Police Station of Anti-Corruption at Jaipur against the petitioners. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. . ;