DOLI LOYI Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ninnong Ratan, learned counsel for the petitioner, also heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned Special P.P., Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), for respondent No. 2.

(2.) The case, in brief, is that because of some huge irregularities committed in the Power Department, Government of A.P. during the year 1993-98 in the tenure of the then Chief Engineer, Shri Darshan Singh, a complaint was made to the CBI in the year 2001 by the Under Secretary (Deptt. of Power) for investigation into the matter. Accordingly a case under section 120B, IPC read with section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act, 1988 was registered against Sh. Darshan Singh and others. The CBI conducted investigation into 8 allegations, namely, allegations 1(A), 1(B), 2(A), 2(B), 3(A), 3(B), 4(A) and 4(B). The present petitioner is made an accused only in respect of allegation 1(A) wherein it was alleged that Shri Darshan Singh in conspiracy with M/s. M.R. Power Projects showed undue favour to the firm in matter of award of contract relating to supply of 30 Portable Micro Hydel sets imported from Czechoslovakia. It was alleged that the work was awarded to the firm without observing any formality and the contract was executed even when the quotation of the party was not the lowest. Shri Darshan Singh the then CE, Power had called for NIQ dated 18.8.1993 for supply of 30 sets of 20 KW hydro generating sets. In response to the said NIQ, a total of nine parties responded. Four offers were for supply of indigenous sets and five offers were for supply of imported sets. The quotations were opened by Shri Darshan Singh and a comparative chart was prepared by him indicating the rates offered by the nine parties. As per the comparative chart prepared by Shri Darshan Singh, the rates of M/s. M.R. Power Projects was shown to be the lowest for imported hydel sets. Thereafter, Shri Dashran Singh submitted a proposal dated 15.6.1994 before the State Works Advisory Board (WAB) for approval for procurement of either indigenous sets or light weight imported hydel sets.

(3.) Strongly defending the case of the petitioner, Mr. Ratan, learned counsel, has contended that in the charge sheet itself, it has been mentioned that "No Administrative Approval ('AA')/Expenditure Sanction ('ES') or Financial Concurrence ('FC') was obtained by Sh. Darshan Singh before issuing the NIQ". In fact, these requirements were needed to be fulfilled before calling of the NIQ. The WAB was only to consider the question of either for procurement of imported hydel sets or indigenous sets. Since the NIQ was already floated and the comparative chart of bids was prepared by the CE(P) himself, there was no question for WAB to see whether the AA/ES, etc., was obtained or not, as it is automatically presumed that these requirements are already fulfilled before issuing the NIQ. No NIQ could be issued without obtaining AA/ES, etc.