PRADEEP SINGH JADON Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, 1973, the applicant is praying for quashment of order dated 5.9.2014 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Indore in Special CBI Case No. 6/2013, whereby application for discharge filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (herein after referred as P.C. Act) has been dismissed.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the non -applicant Central Bureau of Investigation (for short 'CBI') had registered a Case No.RC0082009A0002 on 12.2.2009 against applicant - Pradeep Singh Jadon, the then Telecom. District Manager, Khargone (M.P.) in a trap for alleged demand of bride from a contractor - (Shri Ramkrishna Patidar). The CBI led the trap on 12.2.2009 and allegedly recovered Rs.1,20,000/ - from the upper drawer of the office table of applicant. The bribe allegedly was demanded for passing the bills of the complainant for laying of Optical Fiber Cable at USO Nandgaon and for giving the approval of work for laying of at Khangwada Site.

(3.) THE CBI recommended the launching of prosecution against the applicant for demand and acceptance of bribe and RDA for such action for retaining the file of contractor without justification. The department of Telecommunication has given its comments on the CBI report and observed that the evidence of motive, demand and acceptance of illegal gratification has not been brought out in adequate measure. The department has not agreed with the recommendation of CBI for launching the prosecution against the applicant and recommended RDA for major penalty will be appropriate for finding out as to whether the applicant was involved in passing the bills, dealing the file and committing any irregularity in given approval for work for any pecuniary gain. There was difference of opinion between the CBI and the department of telecommunication. To resolve the difference of opinion a joint meeting was held by the Central Vigilance Commission (for short, 'CVC')on 2.12.2009 with the CBI and the Department of Telecommunication. On 3.2.2010, the Central Vigilance Commission in agreement with the department of telecommunication, does not find adequate evidence in the case to justify launching of prosecution against the applicant. The Commission also does not find any case for initiation of disciplinary action against the applicant. The Ministry of Communication and I.T. Department of Telecommunications vide letter/order No. 9 -33/2009 -Vig.I has concluded that prima facie there is no case of sanction for prosecution and refused to grant sanction for prosecution of the applicant. The applicant received letter dated 24.02.2010 from the Department of Telecommunication, New Delhi whereby request to grant sanction for prosecution of the applicant was declined by the Competent Authority. As such, closure of the case against the applicant and revocation of his suspension was directed. Relevant para / order reads, as under: -