N.C. TANDON Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Ambala, vide which N. C. Tandon, temporary Suprintendent B & R, Grade I, has been convicted under Section 5(2) read with Section 5 (I) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to a fine of Rs. 1000/ -, or, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, respectively. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. N. C. Tandon has filed this appeal.

(2.) THE Learned Counsel for the Appellant has raised preliminary objection that the order sanctioning the prosecution of the Appellant has not been given by the Appointing Authority and, therefore, his conviction is bad in law.

(3.) ORDER sanctioning the prosecution was passed by Brig. Naresh Prasad, Chief Engineer, North Western Zone, Chandigarh, on 24th June 1971. Vide letter Exhibit P. Q/1, the Chief Engineers C. W. Q. and N. D. E S., were authorised to make appointment to Class III and IV service and the post of Superintendent B & R Grade I is included in these services -Exhibit P. Q/1 is dated 27th April, 1956. The letter Exhibit P. Q/1 was addressed to the Chief Engineers, Southern Command, Poona, Eastern Command, Lucknow, Western Command, Simla. The C. W. Q., N. D. E. S., Bombay and the Commandant. College of Military Engineering, Kirkee. In 1956 North Western Zone, Chandigarh, had not been created. On the request of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Nanda, counsel for the Respondent, was directed to produce copy of the letter vide which Chief Engineer North Western Zone Chandigarh, was appointed as an Appointing Authority to Class III and IV posts. He has produced copy of the letter and it is annexure B. It is dated 14th of January, 1972. The copy of the letter annexure B shows that Brig. Naresh Prasad Chief Engineer, was delegated the powers of Appointing Authority on 14th January, 1972. The sanction Exhibit P. Q. is dated 24th June, 1972. The learner counsel for the Respondent contended that the Chief Engineers were designated as the appointing Authorities to the Class III and IV services and since Brig. Naresh Prasad is the Chief Engineer, so the sanction given by him is legal. This contention of his cannot be accepted because Brig. Naresh Prasad was never a Chief Engineer of the Western Command, Simla, on the date, the sanction of prosecution of the accused war given. No doubt Brig Naresh Prasad is the Chief Engineer but as he was not the Appointing Authority of the Appellant at the time he gave the sanction of his prosecution, so the sanction Exhibit P. Q. is not a valid sanction for prosecution of the Appellant, without proper sanct on the Appellant could not be prosecuted. Solely on this point this appeal is accepted and it is not necessary to go into the merits of the case. The conviction and sentence of the Appellant are set aide and he is acquitted and this appeal is accepted. His bail bond is discharged.