K.C. SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed this revision against the order dated 2.8.2006, passed by Special Judge (Lokayukta), Jabalpur, in Special Case No.1/2003, whereby the application u/s 321 of CrPC, for withdrawal of prosecution of the petitioner, was dismissed.

(2.) PETITIONER alongwith 10 other accused persons is being prosecuted for the offence u/ls 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and section 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

(3.) ACCORDING to prosecution, the aforesaid certificate was issued in respect to development of the land, survey No.152/1, area 44.70 acres, situated in Marhatal, Jabalpur. This land was purchased by the society in auction by Sales Tax Officer and Additional Tahsildar. From the years 1972 -73 to 1975 -76, this land was recorded in the revenue records in the name of Dashrath, Gokul, Moti, Omkar Prasad, Narayan Prasad and Chhotelal as Bhumi Swami. In respect of above land, a criminal case was pending against these persons before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jabalpur, under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 and this land was covered under Master Plan. Government Pleader C.K. Sharma who was representing the State in that case, conspired with the bhumiswamis and with a view to save the land from being vested in the Government under the provisions of the said Act, got the land transferred to Dwarka Dal Mill, Jabalpur. It is said that partner of Dwarka Dal Mill and C.K. Sharma with the connivance of Sheel Chand Jain, the then Sales Tax Officer, Jabalpur, got the aforesaid land auctioned in lieu of recovery of taxes from Dwarka Dal Mill. The land was purchased by the aforesaid society in auction. It is alleged that C.K. Sharma conspired with petitioner K.C. Shrivastava and obtained the colonization for the society licence in the year 1984 and disposed the land. According to prosecution, in the said transaction the land owners and society earned huge profits, which resulted in financial loss to the Government. Since according to prosecution, petitioner under the conspiracy with other accused persons had participated in commission of the offence in granting licence of colonization to society, he was also liable to be prosecution.