VARINDER PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner submitted a complaint against Mr. Hardial Singh Mann, Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ferozepur Range, Ferozepur, to the Central Vigilance Commission, new Delhi. A copy of the complaint dated September 29, 2000, as submitted by the petitioner, has been produced as Annexure P5 with the writ petition. It has been stated before us by the learned counsel that this complaint was forwarded to the State Government, which in turn passed it on to the Vigilance Bureau for investigation. After looking into the matter, the papers have been placed before a High Powered Committee. This committee has been constituted by the State Government in pursuance to its instructions dated March 6, 2000. A copy of the instructions has been produced as Annexure P1 with the writ petition.

(2.) While the matter was pending with the State Government, the petitioner appears to have filed Criminal Misc. No. 12833-M of 2001. Mr. Bhardwaj states that this application was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with the prayer that the directions for registration of a criminal case against Mr. Hardial Singh Mann on the basis of the inquiry having been conducted by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, vigilance Bureau, Punjab, be given and that the investigation be entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation. While this application is still pending, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. He, inter alia, prays that the memorandum dated March 6, 2000 be quashed in so far as it is contrary to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He further prays that directions be given to the Vigilance Department to adhere to the mandatory provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) We have heard Mr. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner's complaint discloses the commission of a cognizable offence by Mr. Mann. Thus, the criminal case should have been registered against Mr. Hardial Singh Mann. He further submits that the procedure provided for the constitution of a High Powered Committee to consider the report is violative of the statutory provision embodied in Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thus, it should be annulled by the issue of a writ of certiorari.