NIMAIN CHARAN PATTNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is an accused in Vigilance P.S. Case No.37 of 1998 corresponding to T.R. Case No.7 of 1996 of the Court of learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar for the offences under Sections 13(2) and 13(1) (C) of P.C. Act read with Sections 409 and 34, I.P.C., has filed this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the above noted proceeding basically on the grounds that there is no prima -facie case for the alleged offences, but the proceeding has been maliciously initiated after his retirement and that inordinate delay has been caused in disposal of the proceeding.

(2.) MR . Bijan Ray, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, who has retired since 1988 and is now virtually in his death bed has been maliciously implicated for an alleged incident of 1982. He argued that considering the want of prima facie case, inordinate delay that has occasioned in disposal of the proceeding and the meagerness of the amount of alleged misappropriation, it would be just and proper to quash the proceeding. In support of his contention, Mr. Ray relied on the cases of Rajkishore Mohanty v. State of Orissa, 79 (1995) CLT 88; Omprakash Saha v. M. Mohanty and another, 1998 (I) OLR 340 and State of West Bengal and others v. Swapan Kumar Guha and others, AIR 1982 SC 949.

(3.) THE cardinal principle in the matter of cognizance is that a Court shall not take cognizance of the offences alleged in the charge -sheet unless prima -facie materials for such offences are available. So, if an offence is disclosed, then cognizance is to be taken by the competent Court and in such situation the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution or u/s 482, Cr.P.C. will not normally interfere because justice requires that person who commits an offence has to be bought to book. This view finds support from the ratio laid down in the cases of Swapan Kumar Guha (supra) and Omprakash Saha (supra) relied on by the petitioner. Now it is to be seen whether in the present case prima -facie materials for the alleged offences are available or whether charge -sheet has been submitted against the petitioner with malafide intention.