K K BHARDWAJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. K.K. Bhardwaj, the petitioner herein was working as Inspector (Vigilance) in Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (in short DESU). During the year 19S2 one D.K. Sharma, Assistant Engineer, DESU was working in Zone 312, Saket, Malviya Nagar, District Nehru Place, New Delhi. It is alleged that the said Mr. Sharma entered into a criminal conspiracy with Mr. S.C. Yadav, Inspector and Mr. Abdul Wahah, Lineman and the present petitioner. Mr. D.K. Sharma authorised S.C. Yadav to draw 1002 MTLT PVT Tropedi Cable from DESU Store, Lawrence Road which docket was duly signed by D.K. Sharma for the maintenance of Sheikh Sarai Phase-II. Mr. S.C. Yadav alongwith Mr. Abdul Wahab drew the said material on 30th November, 1982. Material was taken out in truck No. DHG-3272. The said truck was owned by Sh. Sukhdev Singh. He was also the Driver of the said truck. The loaded truck was given to Sh. Gulab Chand Jain and Shri Juwahar Lal at the instructions of the present petitioner, Mr. K.K. Bhardwaj. Petitioners was waiting Dutside the store For the purposes of receiving the material for final disposal. Mr. Gulab Chand Jain and Mr. Jawahar Lal took the loaded truck towards Model Town after which Mr. S.C. Yadav; Mr. Abdul Wahab and the petitioner left for their respective offices, the truck was handed over to Mr. Arvind Gupta near Gujrawalan Town, Delhi. He took the loaded truck towards Karawal Nagar (Trans yamuna) Delhi. Transportation charges were paid to the Driver by Mr. Gulab Chand Jain. The said material was sold for Rs. 30,000.00. Out of the said sale proceeds a sum of Rs. 6,000.00 Rs. 8,000.00 and Rs. 4,000.00 were paid to S.C. Yadav, K.K. Bhardwaj, the petitioner herein and Abdul Wahab respectively.

(2.) It was in this backdrop the petitioner was arrested. He was, however, released on bail. Since prima facie case was made out against the petitioner hence charges under Section 120-B read with Section 409 Indian Penal Code were framed against him by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 21sl January, 1988.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that charges were framed on 21st January, 1998 whereas till date prosecution has not even completed a single witness. Part statement of Mr. Jawahar Lal (PW-1) was recorded. But till date his remaining evidence has not been concluded. Prosecution'has cited as many as 13 witnesses. For the examination of one witness it has taken almost a decade for the prosecution. How much lime it will take to examine the remaining witnesses? Mayabe life lime of the petitioner. Already two of the co-accused have died during the pendency of this trial. Petitioner was summoned for 19th November, 1985 and since then he has been attending the Court regularly but the Trial has not proceeded. It is endlessly continuing. Statement, of Mr. Jawahar Lal (PW-1) had been deferred from time to time for no fault of the petitioner.