B K GUPTA (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS V K GUPTA), S/O RAM JI LAL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both the revisions arise out of the same criminal case pending before the Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act of 1988'), they are disposed of together by this common order.

(2.) The present revisions have been preferred against the orders dated 17.7.2018 and 28.7.2018 passed by the Special Judge under the Act of 1988, Bemetara in Special Case No.3 of 2016. Vide impugned order dated 17.7.2018, the Special Court has rejected the objection of the Applicants raised with regard to its jurisdiction and vide impugned order dated 28.7.2018, the Special Court has framed charges against all the Applicants for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that the Respondent/State filed a charge-sheet in Crime No.13 of 2006 against absconded co-accused a public servant, namely, Om Prakash Verma, the then Tahsildar, Saja and against the present Applicants for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Act of 1988 and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case, M/s Pochi Farms Private Limited (henceforth 'the Pochi Farms') entered into agreements to purchase lands from various villagers/farmers for which agreements to sell for different sale considerations were executed between the Pochi Farms and the land sellers. The farmers/sellers executed a power of attorney appointing B.K. Gupta, one of the present Applicants, as their power of attorney holder. B.K. Gupta ultimately executed deed of agreements to sell lands on behalf of the farmers to the Pochi Farms. On the basis of agreements to sell, an application under Sections 115 and 116 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code was moved by Subhash Hardaha, Applicant No.4 of Criminal Revision No.961 of 2018 before the Court of Tahsildar, Saja and as a result thereof the Pochi Farms got entered its name in Column No.12 of the concerned revenue record to be the possession holder of the said lands for a period of 1 year. It is alleged that absconded co-accused then Tahsildar Om Prakash Verma illegally recorded the possession of the Pochi Farms in Column No.12 of the revenue record. Since sale-deeds were not executed between the buyer and the sellers, a loss of registration fee etc. was sustained by the Government. It is also the case of the prosecution that the lands for which agreements were entered into exceeded the prescribed ceiling limit under the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Land Ceiling Act. V.P. Agrawal, arrayed as Applicant No.1 in Criminal Revision No.961 of 2018, has been impleaded as an accused for being Managing Director of the Pochi Farms. Applicant No.2, Sudhakar Sarswat and Applicant No.3, Balvir Sharma of Criminal Revision No.961 of 2018 have been impleaded as accused for being Directors of the Pochi Farms and Applicant No.4, Subhash Hardaha of Criminal Revision No.961 of 2018 has been impleaded as an accused for being an employee of the Pochi Farms. Applicant Subhash Hardaha is the person who moved the application under Sections 115 and 116 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code before the Court of Tahsildar, Saja. B.K. Gupta, Applicant of Criminal Revision No.958 of 2018, has been arrayed as an accused on the ground that he was the power of attorney holder of the farmers/land sellers, whose lands have been purchased by the Pochi Farms. After filing of the charge-sheet, co-accused Tahsildar Om Prakash Verma did not appear before the Special Judge. Therefore, the Special Judge, vide order dated 5.4.2018, declared him to be absconded and a permanent arrest warrant has been issued against him. On 14.6.2018, all the present Applicants moved an objection before the Special Judge that the case of main accused public servant Tahsildar Om Prakash Verma has been separated and is not being tried by the Special Judge, therefore, the case of the present Applicants, who are not public servants and alleged to have committed only an offence of conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code, cannot be tried by the Special Court constituted under the Act of 1988. Vide the impugned order dated 17.7.2018, the Special Judge rejected the objection. Thereafter, on 28.7.2018, the Special Judge framed the charges against the present Applicants only for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and not for any offence punishable under the Act of 1988. Hence, the present revisions have been preferred by the Applicants.