LAWS(MPH)-2017-12-168

N M SHRIVASTAVA Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Decided On December 14, 2017
N M Shrivastava Appellant
V/S
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of both the above-mentioned petitions for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") being MCRC No.25198/2017 and MCRC No.25774/2017 filed on behalf of the petitioners N.M. Shrivastava and Dr. S.C. Tiwari respectively, who apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No. RC2172015A0025 (formerly STF Crime No.12/2013) registered with Police Station Central Bureau of Investigation, Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 read with 120-B of IPC; Section 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ("PC Act"); Sections 43 read with 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("IT Act"); and Sections 3-D (1) and (2) and 4 of the M.P. Recognised Examination Act, 1937 ("Act of 1937") as enumerated in the charge-sheet though in the bail applications the offence mentioned is that under Sections 409/419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC; Sections 65 and 66 of the IT Act; Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the PC Act and Sections 3-D (1) and (2) and 4 of the Act of 1937.

(2.) Petitioner N.M. Shrivastava in MCRC No.25198/2017 was the Joint Director posted in the office of Director, Medical Education and Dr.S.C. Tiwari petitioner in MCRC No.25774/2017 is the then Director, Medical Education, Government of M.P. Both these petitions arise out of the same crime number and almost on similar allegations. The modus operandi has been discussed in detail in a separate order being passed today in MCRC No.24600/2017 (Dr. Divya Kishore Satpathi vs. CBI) and other connected bail applications. However, the additional arguments, as are raised by the petitioners, are being dealt with hereinafter.

(3.) The role of the petitioners as per the charge-sheet is that schedule of second counselling was prepared by the petitioners on 13.09.2012, which was to last for six days as against the counselling in Government Medical Colleges, which was to last for three days. The delay was intended to shift the allotment process and admission of allotted candidates towards the last date i.e. 30.09.2012 with the intention to help the private medical colleges. The schedule of second counselling was from 18.09.2012 till 25.09.2012 and the last date for the allotted candidates to report in the college was 29.09.2012 but many candidates did not join the college. This enabled the medical colleges to fill these seats through their own preferred candidates without any due process and without following any merit. It is also pointed out that Dr. J.K. Sharma, Dean of R.D. Gardi Medical College, Ujjain informed the Director, Medical Education on 14.09.2012 that the schedule of admission has to be strictly followed as per the judgment of the Supreme Court (Priya Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, 2012 7 SCC 433) and has to be completed by 15th September. The second round of counselling from 18.09.2012 to 25.09.2012 would be in contravention to the orders of the Supreme Court. Dr. Sharma further suggested that the Director, Medical Education must direct the candidates to report to the college on 26.09.2012 by the last working hours and that the candidates should bring the required fee, caution money and original documents but the investigation reveals that the petitioners ignored the suggestion and the private medical colleges made admission without due process on 30.09.2012. Even as SAIMS Medical College, Indore vide communication dated 27.08.2012 requested the Director, Medical Education to complete the process of allotment of students to the colleges for the State quota as per stipulations of Medical Council of India and the order of the Supreme Court. The report is Dr. J.K. Sharma and S.D. Joshi of SAIMS stated that they met the petitioner Dr. S.C. Tiwari and requested to complete the process of allotment at an early stage otherwise middleman and some private colleges would try to conduct illegal admissions. They also expressed fear that late schedule will lead to bogus admissions by some private colleges on 30.09.2012.