AJITA BAJPAI PANDE Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On behalf of the petitioner, this petition is preferred under Section 482 of the Cr.RC. to quash and set aside some findings of the judgment dated 15.12.2011 passed by the 1 st Additional Sessions Judge/ Special judge (constituted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988) (in short 'the Act ') in Special Case No. 12/2009 till the extent of making observations that inspite the earlier order passed in Special Case No. 11/2007 vide dated 15.7.2009, discharging the petitioner in the lack of proper sanction under section 19 of the Act by extending the authority to the prosecution to file the charge -sheet against the petitioner after obtaining the sanction for prosecution from the competent authority, but the Court has neither been apprised about any such proceedings nor any document in this regard has been filed while the liability to perform such act was on the investigation agency, with a further prayer to discharge the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner being member of the Indian Administrative Service was posted for some period as Member (Finance) in the M.R Electricity Board (in short'the Electricity Board') in the year 1996 -97. On information of committing the corruption in the Electricity Board by its officials in purchasing 2.5 to 10 Amperes and 5 to 20 Amperes Single Phase Energy Meters during the period of posting the petitioner by which they had caused the financial loss to the Electricity Board and the Government in crores, an Enquiry being Case No.29/98 was initiated. In such enquiry, prima facie it was established that the alleged offence was committed by the officials of Electricity Board, on which Enquiry Officer recommended for registration of the crime. After examining his report, a Crime No.46/2004 was registered against officials of Electericity (sic:Electricity) Board namely N.P.Shrivastava, S.K.Das Gupta, Prakash Chand Mandloi, Basant Kumar Mehta, Mohan Chand and present petitioner Smt.Ajita Bajpai Pande at Special Police Establishment, Lokayukt Organisation, Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Section 13(1 )(d) read with section 13(2) of the Act and Section I20 -B of the Indian Penal Code. After holding the investigation on establishing the ingredients of the alleged offence, against aforesaid S.K.Das Gupta, the then Chairman of the Electricity Board, Smt.Ajita Bajpai Pandey, Indian Administrative Service and Member (T and D), the petitioner and against above mentioned other accused, the charge -sheet as Special Case No. 12/2009 for their prosecution under the aforesaid offence was filed on dated 14.6.2007.

(3.) After filing the charge -sheet, on behalf of the present petitioner and S.K.Das Gupta, so also on behalf of Basant Kumar Mehta, the application under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer that in the lack of requisite sanction for their prosecution from the competent authority, they be excluded and discharged from the alleged prosecution was filed. On consideration taking into account that the petitioner being I.A. S. Officer is still working as a public servant and in the lack of requisite sanction from the competent authority, the cognizance of the alleged offence could not be taken against her, by allowing her application, she was discharged with further observation that the prosecution agency shall be at liberty to file fresh charge -sheet against the petitioner after obtaining the requisites sanction from the competent authority under Section 19 of the Act, while such applications of the co -accused S.K.Das Gupta and Basant Kumar Mehta was dismissed by holding that they being retired from the post of public servant, no Sanction for their prosecution is required against them under the provision of Section 197 of the Cr.P.C. or of the Act. In such premises, on the basis of such earlier filed charge -sheet, the case was proceeded to hold the trial against the co -accused N.P.Shrivastava, S.K.Das Gupta, Prakashchand Mandloi, Basant Kumar Mehta and Mohan Chand. After holding the trial against such accused, on appreciation vide impugned judgment dated 15.12.2011, all such co -accused have been convicted and sentenced under Section 13(1 )(d) read with 13(2) of the Act and section 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code for R.1. 3 years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/ - in the earlier section while R.1. 6 months with fine of Rs. 1000/ -in later. As per finding of such judgment, it was found that by the alleged act, the accused have caused the loss of Rs.6,43,74,900/ -. On appreciation of the evidence in the impugned judgment in Paras 17,18 and 19, it was stated asunder: ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...