P A SAMUAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common order, Cr. R. No. 417/99 (P. A. Samual v. State of M. P.), Cr. R. No. 327/99 (Sharad Panwar v. State of M. P.), Cr. R. No. 326/99 (Sharad Panwar v. State of M. P.), Cr. R. No. 453/99 (Krishna Rashinkar v. State) and Cr. R. No. 456/99 (Krishna Rashinkar v. State) are also being disposed of.

(2.) THESE Cr. Revision Nos. 416/99, 417/99, 327/99 and 328/99 have been directed against the order dated 26-3-99 passed by the learned Special Judge, Indore in Special Sessions Trial No. 7/97 relating to plot Nos. 793, 794 and 795 and in another Special Sessions Trial No. 8/97 relating to plot Nos. 792, 795, 797 and 798, framing the charges against the petitioners under Sections 5 (1) (d)/5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and in the alternative under Section 13 (1) (d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE Special Police Establishment, Lokayukta Office, Indore had filed a charge-sheet against the petitioners and against the other co-accused persons for the aforesaid offences. The prosecution case is that the M. P. Housing Board of Indore had developed a colony called as 'bajrang Nagar Colony, Indore'. In the year 1983, three plots were allotted through Chairman quota from Bhopal. The allegations against the accused persons in both these cases are that the three plots bearing Nos. 793, 794 and 795 in Special Case No. 7/97 and Plot Nos. 792,796,797 and 798 relating to Special Case No. 8/97 were initially of the size of 45' x 50'. But later on in the year 1987, the size of these plots were increased and they were allotted in the year 1987 with the size 50' x 73'. This size was increased without having any lawful authority, power and jurisdiction by the concerned accused persons and thereby obtained wrongful gain to themselves and wrongful loss to the Housing Board/state because the allottee of the plots have sold their plots to other persons in pieces on higher prices. According to the prosecution, all the accused persons including the petitioners have taken active participation right from the allotment of plots till delivery of possession to the allottees at one point of time or other. They all were knowing the legal position that according to the rules, regulations and provisions of the Housing Board, the size of plots could not be increased and, therefore, by doing so, they have committed the aforesaid offences after hetching conspiracy.