VIJENDRA SINGH JAFA Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.10.2015 and the order dated 23.11.2015 vide which orders of framing of charges and the actual order of framing of charges were passed by the Sessions Judge. The charges have been framed against the petitioner under Sections 120B- IPC read with Sections 420, 467,468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner being that no sanction under the Single Directive No.4.7(3)(i) of the Government of India (being the operational law at that time) having been obtained prior to the investigation and cognizance against the petitioner in terms of impugned order and the subsequent order directing framing of charge is an order without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. Even on merits no case is made out under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The argument is however confined only to the lack of grant of sanction.

(2.) Record shows that as per the version of the prosecution, the petitioner V.S.Jafa, a public servant and working in his capacity as the Executive Director of the TRIFED along with certain other co-accused persons (one public servant and others private persons) had allegedly diverted funds of the Government of India to private persons which funds had been allotted to them for the procurement of paddy, mustard seeds and niger seeds and by abusing their official position they caused a pecuniary benefit to themselves and to the private accused persons.

(3.) Record further reflects that TRIFED was a Co-operative Society which was established in the year 1984 for the welfare of the tribal societies. It was the authorized Central Government agent on behalf of the FCI for a proper and effective implementation of the procurement drive of foodgrains. The petitioner was posted as Executive Director (ED) on deputation to TRIFED. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner in his capacity as Executive Director of TRIFED along with others co-accused persons had abused their position as public servant and in criminal conspiracy with the private agent appointed by TRIFED caused undue pecuniary advantage to themselves in the procurement of paddy, mustard seeds and nizer seeds during the Kharib season of 1990-91 in the Bodo tribal area of Assam.