LAWS(ORI)-2018-7-74

BHABESWAR RANA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA (VIGILANCE)

Decided On July 25, 2018
Bhabeswar Rana Appellant
V/S
State of Odisha (Vigilance) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 13.09.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Phulbani in G.R. Case No. 70 of 2013 (V)/G.R. Case No. 29 of 2011 (V) framing charges against the present petitioner under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, rejecting an application filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 239 of the Crimial P.C. 1973 to discharge him from the alleged offences.

(2.) Prosecution case is that the present petitioner as informant lodged an F.I.R. before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Phulbani on 23.06.2011 alleging that he had been to the electric office at Manamunda and requested the Junior Engineer concerned, the principal accused, Brahmananda Sahu for giving electric connection to his shop. He alleged that the said Junior, Engineer demanded an amount of Rs. 20,000.00 for giving such commercial connection and the request made by the informant-petitioner to waive such demand, was not paid heed to. Basing on his F.I.R., Vigilance P.S. Case No. 29 of 2011 was registered under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and a trap was laid on 26.06.2011. It is further alleged that the concerned Junior Engineer was caught red handed by the vigilance officials with tainted money of Rs. 20,000.00 and the investigation was taken up.

(3.) In course of investigation, the witnesses were examined. But, the informant-petitioner while giving his statement under section 164 of the Crimial P.C. 1973 resiled from his earlier version denying any such demand by the concerned Junior Engineer or payment made by him. Since he resiled from his earlier version he along with the concerned Junior Engineer was charge-sheeted under Sec. 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d)/7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with the allegation that the present petitioner by not supporting his earlier version, abetted the commission of the alleged offence by coaccused.