PARKASH CHAND SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parkash Chand Sharma has filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing First Information Report No. 120 dated 26.8.1992 under Section 7.13 (1)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered at Police Station Division No. 4, Jalandhar City.

(2.) The brief facts relevant for the disposal of this petition as emerge from the First Information Report annexure P/I/A are that Majit Singh son of Dalip Singh complainant purchased a plot measuring 5 marlas situated at Ladowali Road, Jalandhar near Krishna Engineering Works in the name of his wife Smt. Balbir Kaur through Shri Sham Kumar Bhardwaj son of Shri Satpal, property dealer, Central Town, Jalandhar vide registered sale-deed and got the mutation entered regarding the same. He started filling the foundations of the said plot. On 26.8.1992 at about 9.00 A.M. Majit Singh was present at the plot when the petitioner who was a Building Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar went there along with his peon, and enquired from Manjit Singh whether he had got the site plan sanctioned. Site plan was shown to the petitioner but he was not satisfied and told that it was not an approved one. The petitioner asked him to see him in his office in the afternoon after making arrangement for a sum of Rs. 2000/as otherwise he was not to allow his plan to be sanctioned. Manjit Singh entreated him to accept a lesser amount and the petitioner agreed to accept Rs. 1000/- by way of bribe to get the plan approved. He asked him to give the amount to his peon Ranjit Singh outside his office and Manjit Singh who did not want to give bribe reported the matter to vigilance department. Subsequently a raid was conducted by Deputy Superintendent of Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar and Ranjit Singh peon was found in possession of Rs. 1000/- which was passed over to him by Manjit Singh by way of bribe to be paid to the petitioner. The tainted money was recovered in the presence of the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner alleged that on 26.8.1992 at about 4.45 P.M. when he along with other staff members was moving for demolition of un-authorised construction in the area of Gur Mandi, the staff of vigilance department took him along and kept him in confinement. He was falsely involved in the case and the allegations made against him even taken to be true did not spell out the ingredient of any offence. No tainted money was recovered from his possession and infact if he had raised any illegal demand then there was no occasion for him to involve any person and he could himself take the amount from the person concerned.