GURNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S /Shri Gurnam Singh and five others mentioned in the head- note of the present petition have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the quashment of the FIR No. 327 dated 26.8.1993 under Sections 8, 9, 13 and 14 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, police station City Jind and quashing of the report/challan dated 17.2.1995 under Section 173 Cr.P.C. mainly on the ground that the allegations of the FIR are nothing but an abuse of the process of law and that on the departmental side the allegations of the complainant as well as other persons had already been inquired into and these allegations have been found to be false and still the submission of the charge-sheet under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was an act towards the abuse of the process of law.

(2.) ONE Shri Sat Narain resident of Jind vide Annexure P.2 submitted an application before the Addl. Deputy Commissioner Jind in which he complained that he made an application for loan of Rs. 25,000/- for hosiery which was duly sanctioned by the District Industries Centre. In spite of the fact that the loan was sanctioned to him he was not disbursed with the loan and he had been visiting the office several times in order to get the loan. One day when he was taking tea outside the Primary Land Development Bank, Jind, he discussed the matter with the teawala namely Shri Kishan, who told the complainant that there was one person by the name of Shri Vijay Kumar, who is in a position to get the loan disbursed as the said Vijay Kumar is the agent of the relevant persons. Accordingly, the complainant met Shri Vijay Kumar, who told the complainant that he would charge Rs. 5,000/- for the work. Ultimately the bargain was struck at Rs. 4,000/-. It may be mentioned here that Shri Sat Narain complainant did not part any money either to Shri Kishan or to Shri Vijay Kumar. Shri Sat Narain further stated in his complaint Annexure P.2 that he still waited for two months and had been frequently visiting the bank but to no effect. Finally he met the Additional Deputy Commissioner on 13.8.1993 and the Additional Deputy Commissioner assured him to approach him after 15.8.1993. The complainant thus made an application Annexure P.2 before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Jind on 21.8.1993.

(3.) AFTER the registration of the case the department also initiated a departmental inquiry which was entrusted to District Manager, HPLDS, Jind, who wrote a letter dated 3.2.1995 to the Managing Director. The allegations of the complaint were inquired into. In para No. 2 of the application it was stated by the Inquiry Officer as follows :-