KAMINIKANTA PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Misc. Cases Nos. 6133/2001, 6134/2001 and 7016/2001 initiated on the applications under S. 438, Cr. P.C. put in by petitioners, namely, Kaminikanta Patnaik, Smt. Suprita Patnaik, Pramod Kumar Sahoo, Pradipta Kumar Nayak, Dinabandhu Pani and Satyabrata Das, respectively, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Sahidnagar P.S. Case No. 243/2001 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2343/2001 under Ss. 465, 468, 477-A, 420 and 420-B/34, I.P.C. now sub-judice before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar are being disposed of by this common order though heard separately.

(2.) At Bhubaneswar there is a private Engineering College by name Orissa Engineering College where petitioner Kaminikanta Patnaik happens to be its President and Director of Admissions whereas petitioners-Smt. Suprita Patnaik, Pradipta Kumar Nayak, Dinabandhu Pani and Satyabrata Das happen to be the Addl. Administrative Officer, Legal Assistant, Accountant, Senior Assistant and admission-in-charge, respectively, who, in collusion with each other are alleged to have committed certain illegal actions such as seat blocking, illegal admission of students in the College by infringement of rules of admission and admitting the students securing less than 60% of aggregate marks, thereby committing fraud and forgery by manipulation and interpolation of documents in connection with which Shri L. N. Behera, Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.I.D., Orissa,Cuttack conducted an enquiry and submitted his report to the effect that during the academic session 2000-2001 there was much discrepancy and hobnobbing of things in the admission of students in the aforesaid College and that one Amit Kumar Pradhan who had rank No. 13703 was sponsored by the Joint Entrance Examination (for short "J.E.E.") during counselling to take admission in Civil Engineering in a payment seats but he was admitted in T/C and Electronics Engineering without the knowledge of the Chairman, J.E.E., D.T.E. and T as well as the Government and a candidate Asamajasya Mohapatra by name was admitted in the College in lieu of non-resident Indian (for short "N.R.I.") from open market and that a candidate Sudeep by name was admitted from open market though he was not sponsored by J.E.E. and that in Electronics and Telecommunication the J.E.E. had sponsored 86 candidates for the academic session 2000 during counselling but the Director, Kaminikanta Patnaik admitted 81 students out of 86 by dropping 5 candidates from the J.E.E. panel, thereby admitting 4 N.R.I. students from the open market in their places beyond J.E.E. panel. No relevant document including transfer certificates could be produced by Orissa Engineering College as regards non-admission of five candidates sponsored by the J.E.E. The Director also admitted one Amit Kumar Pradhan in Electronics Engineering branch though he was already admitted in Civil Engineering during counselling by J.E.E. as per his own option. As against in-take capacity 90 in Computer Science Engineering 86 candidates were sponsored by the J.E.E. but as per the role sheet given by the Director of C.E.C., it was found that only three seats were reserved as per the orders of this Court. Practically, the Director admitted 85 students including four N.R.Is. In lieu of N.R.I. (not sponsored by J.E.E.) and three other candidates, namely, Smrutiranjan Sahoo, Biswajit Mishra and Bijaya Kumar Pani, who are not sponsored by the J.E.E. during counselling thereby creating excess against intake capacity. During the academic Session 2000 altogether ten J.E.E. sponsored candidates in different branches did not take admission. They have individually filed affidavits mentioned their problems for not taking admission. They were asked to leave the payment seats and thereby paving way for the management to earn huge amount of money by giving these seats to non J.E.E. candidates later on. The draft amount of Rs. 25,000.00 against the payment seats deposited by these candidates during admission through J.E.E. counselling were prepared by the staff of the College and handed over to them for deposit. Later on that money was paid to them to leave the seats to be filled in by the Director to earn huge amount of money in shape of donation by accepting the candidates from the open market violating the norms of A.I.C.T.E. and guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(3.) The enquiry report also revealed that the students who left their seats mentioned in their applications that due to the personal problems they did not report at the College. In such a case they are to be treated as dropped out students and money deposited by them during admission by J.E.E. counselling should have been refunded to them. But there was no document available in the institution in this regard. This process is followed in Government Engineering Colleges but not in private professional Colleges. On the date of counselling by the J.E.E. the candidates are given separate dates deliberately to report at their respective colleges for taking admission. This paves the way for the management of private professional colleges particularly the Orissa Engineering College for bargaining to earn money by admitting dummy candidates out of J.E.E. panel which amounts to forgery in admission. It is also alleged that the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are not being followed by the petitioner in the Orissa Engineering College in admissions of students. The management of Orissa Engineering College is taking 5% of the candidates of the in-take capacity in particular branch as N.R.I. This provides opportunity to the management to fill up seats by candidates from open market having secured 45% of marks and thereby earning a huge amount of money from them. The petitioner by adopting forgery in the above manner in admission by seat blocking in O.E.C. in each branch earned a huge amount of money which is actionable under the Criminal Law for which the D.S.P. Crime Branch reported to the Superintendent of Police, C.I.D., Orissa, Cuttack to take action against the present petitioners. Accordingly, Sahidnagar P.S. Case No. 243/2001 has been registered against the petitioners and on completion of investigation, the prosecuting agency lodged charge-sheet against the accused persons including the present petitioners.