VIKAS CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal revision has been preferred against the Judgment and order dated 10.11.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Moradabad in S.T. No. 735 of 2014 whereby the discharge application of the accused was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 31.3.2013 Naveen Singh Rawat informant along with other Vigilance Officers boarded train No.14258 from New Delhi with purpose to check the train. They had information that by demanding 50 to 100 rupees from the passenger, the R.P.F. staff make them sit in the compartment reserved for disabled persons. On this Jashwant Singh and Om Pal Parcel Porter were sent, who went to the accused and requested that they may be permitted to sit in the reserved compartment. The R.P.F. personnel took money from the passengers sitting in the reserved compartment. The accused took hundred rupees from the independent witnesses, which were paid to them and the Vigilance Team was informed. On information, the vigilance team boarded the train at Gajraula station. They revealed their identity to R.P.F. Constable Vinod Kumar and R.P.F. Constable Vikas Chauhan. When the accused were asked to give their personal money and the currency in the bags were counted which was more. Thus, the F.I.R. was lodged. Later on the discharge application was moved before the trial court, who rejected discharge application, vide impugned order. Against this order, the revision has been preferred.

(3.) Counsel for the revisionist has placed reliance on Mohd. Iqbal Ahmed Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1979 AIR(SC) 677 but this law does not help the applicant. Inasmuch as it has been laid down that the validity of sanction can only be looked into after the evidence is adduced.