DEBORAJ MISHRA Vs. STATE (VIG.)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for his release on bail in Sambalpur Vigilance P.S. Case No. 78 of 2014, which corresponds to Bolangir VGR Case No. 8 of 2014. The offences alleged against him are punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 465/467/471/409/120-B of I.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that he during his incumbency as Collector, Balangir made an advertisement to fill-up certain posts in the rank of Revenue Inspector, Asst. Revenue Inspector and Amin in the Revenue Department of the district. Since more posts were available after advertisement, the corrigendum was issued to the advertisement enhancing the number of posts advertised and, accordingly, many candidates applied for the posts. After scrutiny of the applications of the candidates, examination was conducted as per schedule, but it is alleged that on completion of the written examination though the petitioner was handed over with the answer sheets in sealed cover, he did not keep the same in safe custody but kept in his residential office, manipulated the answer sheets in order to show favours to some of the candidates and got the same corrected even by unauthorized and unqualified candidates and in this way, got many candidates, who were undeserving, selected and issued appointment letters. The sum and substance of the allegations are that there was large scale bungling in the recruitment process at the instance of the present petitioner in connivance with some of his subordinates. The petitioner, as such, made conspiracy to commit fraud and forgery, criminal breach of trust and criminal misconduct as a public servant along with some of his subordinates and committed the same. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the petitioner has been taken to custody.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner during course of the argument submits that the petitioner was though the Chairman of the Recruitment Committee, but he has got nothing to do with the valuations of the answer scripts though he was on overall supervision of the recruitment process. In such premises, as because some manipulation was there in the valuations, he cannot be held responsible. Therefore, the allegation against him is false and concocted. He further submits that the petitioner is no more Collector in the said district and he has been transferred from the post since long and no more the custodian of the documents, which are the sole evidence in this case. He being also an IAS Officer and in Government service, there is also no chance of his abscondance, more so when he has his moors in the Society as he has a family and the residence in the State of Orissa. There is also no chance of his tampering with the investigation/evidence as in this case, the entire case is based on documentary evidence and the statement of the evaluators of the papers and the other persons involved in the recruitment process have since been examined and the documents have been taken to custody by the Vigilance Department. The petitioner is also in custody for about a month and the Vigilance Department has also not shown his further custodial interrogation in this case is essential to collect any evidence. In such premises, he submits to release the petitioner on bail, even if the allegations that there was large scale bungling in the recruitment process and according to the Vigilance Department, materials are there showing involvement of the petitioner.