LAWS(ALL)-2012-2-139

DEVENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On February 10, 2012
DEVENDRA KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision filed under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' in short) is directed against the order dated 2.7.2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar whereby cognizance has been taken upon. Charge-sheet has been filed and revisionist has been summoned. I have heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate for the revisionist and Sri D.R. Chaudhari, learned Government Advocate for the State of U.P.Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the revision are that First Information Report was lodged on 5.1.2011 by CO. (City), Muzaffarnagar, registered as Case Crime No. 16 of 2011 under Section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Muzaffarnagar.

(2.) Allegations contained in the F.I.R. briefly stated that on getting a tip of corruption in Muzaffarnagar Development Authority, District Magistrate sent ADM (F), City Magistrate, C.O. (City) for taking necessary action. These three officers reached at the office of Development Authority, Muzaffarnagar at about 22:30 hrs. They found Assistant Engineer, R.P. Singh, Junior Engineer, Yogesh Chandra Gupta alongwith builders present in the office. Officers saw that some money was given to J.E., Yogesh Chandra Gupta and A.E., R.P. Singh by the builders.

(3.) J.E., Yogesh Chandra Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('Act' in short). Learned Sessions Judge took cognizance Gupta kept all the money in his file, however all the persons except J.E., Gupta fled away from the scene after seeing the Police party. Yogesh Chandra Gupta (J.E.) was arrested from the spot with a sum of Rs. 66,000/-. He confessed before the City Magistrate that he has taken Rs. 66,000/- as bribe from Tewatia, owner of A to Z builder for helping him in the construction of his Colony. Upon investigation, charge-sheet was submitted on 1.6.2011 against Revisionist (Devendra Kumar) under Section 7/12 of the and summoned the revisionist vide order dated 2.7.2011. This very order has been impugned in the revision.