RAM CHANDRA SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against order dated 20.02.2007 passed by the learned Special C.J.M. (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar in V.G.R: Case No. 39 of 2005 rejecting the Petitioner's prayer to discharge him of the charge framed for commission of offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (for short 'the E.C. Act) and Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the I.P.C.').

(2.) PETITIONER 's case is that he was appointed under the Public Distribution System (for short 'the P.D.S.') and other government schemes as a Storage Agent of food grains in terms of agreement at Annexure -3 entered in to between Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and the Petitioner. In course of surprise check conducted by officers of Vigilance Department on 01.12.2005, in the Petitioner's depot, shortage of 10 quintals 10 kgs. 175 gms. of the stock of A.P.L. wheat was detected. On the basis of report lodged by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Unit Office, Puri, case was registered for commission of offences under Section 7 of the E.C. Act and Section 409 of the I.P.C. On completion of investigation, charge as stated supra was framed. The Petitioner had earlier approached this Court in Criminal Revision No. 93 of 2007 with a prayer to set aside the order of framing of charge. In the said revision the Petitioner was directed to approach the trial Court under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Accordingly, the Petitioner filed an application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the trial Court in response to which the impugned order was passed.

(3.) IN reply, it was contended by the learned Counsel appearing for Vigilance Department that existence of contractual relationship between the parties and allegations of violation of terms of the contract do not provide blanket protection against initiation of criminal prosecution. Commission of offence under any penal statute is punishable by criminal Court irrespective of and apart from civil liabilities for which an accused may be liable to be proceeded against. It was further argued that agreement Ext.3 itself stipulates that in the event of the agreement being terminated by the Corporation, the Storage Agent shall be, in addition to any other liability, Civil, Criminal or under Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act or under the provision of Code of Civil Procedure or under the terms of agreement or otherwise, liable to pay any loss or damage sustained to Corporation on account of such termination. In the present case, shortage of stock detected in the depot indicated misappropriation and breach of trust in respect of essential commodities under the P.D.S., meant for distribution to general public, on the part of the Petitioner which is punishable under the E.C. Act as well as under the I.P.C.