RAM KEWAL KANNAUJIA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate. Under challenge in this writ petition is F.I.R. relating to case crime no. 190 of 2009 under Section 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC read with Section 13 (1) D and Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. At police station Gauriganj, district Sultanpur. We have gone through the contents of the impugned F.I.R. The allegations levelled against the petitioners in the F.I.R. are to the effect that a number of trees shown to have been sown by the petitioners were actually not planted and the money involved with respect to plantation of trees and engagement of labourers was mis-appropriated by them. An inquiry was also conducted and in the inquiry it was found that the petitioners are the persons who had embezzled and mis-appropriated the amount sanctioned for said purpose. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are not the sanctioning authorities with respect to plantation of trees and payment to labourers and it is only the District Forest Officer concerned, who could have sanctioned amount for said purpose, as such, the submission is that the petitioners cannot be hauled up and challaned. We have confined ourselves to the contents of the F.I.R. and since the impugned F.I.R. discloses commission of cognizable offence, as such the same cannot be quashed. Besides, the apex Court in the case of Satyanarain Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan reported in (2001) 8 SCC 607 has held that the courts shall refrain in granting indulgences in case covered under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In view of the above, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.