PRIT PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed for quashing of the consequent proceedings emanating out of FIR No. 23 dated 9.11.2012, registered under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Patiala.

(2.) AS per the prosecution allegations, the public land was usurped by the co -accused of the petitioner. The sale deed, with respect to the said transactions which were earlier refused to be registered, was subsequently registered by co -accused Gurinder Singh Walia, Naib Tehsildar, in collusion with the petitioner and Halqa Patwari and sanctioned the mutation. It was alleged that the accused, with their connivance and under a conspiracy, misappropriated the public land measuring 5950 square yards, market value of which is worth Rs. 200/250.00 crores. On these allegations, the present case was registered under the aforesaid offence.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that in the present petition, he will only confine to legal issue. He contended that in this case, the preliminary enquiry has been conducted by Pritam Singh, Senior Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Patiala. The case has also been registered on his complaint and he has also investigated the case. Learned counsel contended that the said police officer was in collusion with the principal accused, namely Kiraninder Singh, the vendor, who had received a huge amount of Rs. 6,50,00,000/ -. But no action has been taken against the main accused, whereas the petitioner, who was simply posted as a Kanungo and had no role to play in the transaction or even in the sanctioning of mutation, has been falsely implicated. Thus, he contended that the partisan investigation conducted by the interested Investigating Officer, who was also the complainant, has resulted into serious prejudice to the petitioner and all the proceedings are vitiated and are liable to be quashed. To support his contentions, he relied upon the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in cases Bhagwan Singh v. The State of Rajasthan, 1976 1 SCC 15 and Megha Singh v. State of Haryana, 1996 11 SCC 709.