SWASTI RANJAN MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 482. Criminal Procedure Code (in short, 'Cr.P.C.) for quashing the proceeding in Vigilance G.R.Case No. 7 of 2005, corresponding to Vigilance FIR No. 7 of 2005 pending in the Court of learned Special C.J.M., Vigilance, Bhubaneswar. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Cell, Bhubaneswar lodged an FIR alleging that the petitioner who is working as Company Secretary of Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar (in short, 'ORHDC') and the Managing Director of the said Corporation entered into a criminal conspiracy with a builder firm 'M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Limited' and in prosecution of that conspiracy sanctioned and disbursed a loan of Rs. 1.5 crores to that firm abusing their official position. Basing on the said FIR Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S.Case No. 7 of 2005 was registered under Section 13(2)(/13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120 -B of IPC and investigation was undertaken. Aggrieved by such registration of the case and investigation, the petitioner has filed the present application for declaring the registration of the case illegal and for quashing of the investigation and the proceeding of the case.

(2.) MR . Govind Das, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was working as Company Secretary of the O.R.H.D.S., Bhubaneswar and his official role was confirmed to the documentation part of the loan transactions and he was in no way concerned with the sanction or disbursement of the loan to M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. and for that reason the case under Section 13(2)/13(1)(d) of the P.C.Act and Section 120 -B of the IPC is not maintainable against him. In this regard, Mr. Das indicated several clauses of the power of attorney, copy of the deed of the agreement, the legal heir certificate, copy of Khatian, copy of the additional agreement and copy of the Board of Resolution. According to him, when the loanee M/s. Metro Builders Pvt. Ltd. had executed the required documents and the title deeds of the property mortgaged had been deposited and valid power of attorney holder had offered collateral security, sanction and disbursement of the loan can never be termed as illegal or product of any criminal conspiracy. Mr. Das, specifically submitted that the allegations and materials put forth by the Vigilance authorities do not constitute any case against the petitioner for the alleged offences and so quashing of the FIR and investigation in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S.Case No. 7 of 2005 is necessary.

(3.) IN the case of Rajesh Bajaj v. State NCT of Delhi and Ors., : 1999CriLJ1833 , the apex Court observed that the inherent power under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is not to be normally exercised for quashing the police investigation as the field of investigation is exclusively reserved for the investigating agency. The Court, however, indicated that in exceptional circumstances where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused the Court may quash the FIR and investigation connected with such FIR. In S.N. Palanitkar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr., : 2001CriLJ4765 , also the apex Court indicated that where the alleged acts against the accused do not constitute any offence, the Court would be justified in exercising the inherent power under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceeding. In Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja and Anr. AIR 2003 Page 2612, the Supreme Court specifically laid down the grounds on which the power under Section 482, Cr.P.C. can be exercised for quashing the FIR and the investigation connected with the FIR. The grounds noted are as follows :