VINOD WALIA Vs. STATE C B I CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Vinod Walia, Assistant Revenue Accountant, working in the office of the S.D.O., Electricity Operation, Sub Division. No. III, Sector 18, Chandigarh, has filed the present petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C., against the respondents with a prayer for quashing the case Crime No. RC-47/96-CHG registered by the C.B.I./S.P.E., Chandigarh, on 23-9-1996 for the offence under Sections 120-B, I.P.C. read with Sections 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, so far as it allegedly pertains to the petitioner.

(2.) On a complaint made by one Shri Ram Prakash Rana, House No. 2030, Sector 21-C, Chandigarh, on 23-9-1996 to the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Sector 30, Chandigarh, case Crime No. 47/96-CHG has been registered against Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, and the petitioner. It has been alleged in the complaint that the complaint is the proprietor of M/s. Blue Moon Tourist Bungalow, carrying on business in House No. 2030, Sector 21-C, Chandigarh, Shri Balwant Singh is the owner of the said bungalow, who purchased the same from Shri Kartar Singh. The complaint had taken the said bungalow on rent from Shri Balwant Singh. There were two electricity meters installed in the said house and the sanctioned load of each meter was 3 K.W. On 10-9-1996 the complaint received bill No. 72301 for Rs. 8236/- to be paid on or before 23-9-1996 in respect of one of the meters having A/C No. 103/2106/203001. The meter reading mentioned in the bill was not correct. The bill was for much high amount. The normal consumption per month against this meter was approximately 250 units, whereas that time the bill for the consumption of 4982 units was received. On the same day, i.e., 10-9-1996 evening the complainant happened to meet the meter reader and told him about the wrong meter reading. The meter reader inspected and asked him to give him (the meter reader) an application along with one photography of the bill and told him that he would get the bill rectified. Accordingly, the complainant gave him an application addressed, to the S.D.O., Electricity Department, Sub Division No. III, Sector 18-A, Chandighar. On 14-9-1996 three persons from Electricity Department came and inspected themeter reading as 1839. Again on 16-9-1996 some other meter reader of the Electricity Department came along with an application and the photocopy of the bill and the inspected the meter and noted the reading as 7897. On 19-9-1996 the complainant again went to the Electricity Office in Sector 18-A, Chandigarh, along with Dr. O. P. Verma, and met Shri Vinod Walia, Accounts Officer, present petitioner, who tried to locate the application dated 10-9-1996, but it was not readily available. He asked the complainant to give another application, which was prepared by Mr. O. P. Verma. On this application Shri Vinod Walia asked Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, to verify the load and report. The application remained with the complainant as in the meanwhile has earlier application dated 10-9-1996 was traced and the petitioner recorded a fresh note on that application. On the same day at about 4 p.m. Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, came to the guest house of the complainant along with one person and inspected the meter and the meter and the entire load of the building. On that day he demanded Rs. 1,000/- and told the complainant that he would have to pay Rupees 500/- to Shri Vinod Walia also. Shri Rajinder Kumar also told the complainant that there was no other way out for getting the bill rectified and the money would have to be paid for the same. Ultimately, he gave Rs. 1,000/- to Mr. Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, in the guest house on that day because a marriage party from Parwanoo (H.P.) had also come and he did not want to create any problem for himself. On 20-9-1996 at about 8 p.m. Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, suddenly came in the presence of he marriage party and started creating problem. He questioned the complainant why the extra lights had been installed and threatened to disconnect the electricity. He then started checking the meters in the presence of all and told that the seals were not original as they did not bear any number. He also told the complainant that he had scolded by the Accountants Officer Shri Vinod Walia for showing the low load of the guest house and the matter had become very serious. He further told the complainant that they would be imposing a penalty of Rs. 30,000/- to Rs. 32,000/- on account of excess load. It was also repeated by Shri Rajinder Kumar that matter could be set right only by the higher officer of the Department.The complainant then asked him about the way out. He told that the complainant that some heavy amount has to be paid for getting the matter sorted out. On the asking of the complainant he disclosed that an amount of Rs. 6500/- had to be paid in addition to the amount of Rs. 1,000/- already paid as bribe. It was also assured to the complainant by Shri Rajinder Kumar that he would get the aforesaid bill rectified and would get the meter changed. The complainant showed his unwillingness to pay the huge amount as bribe and his incapability of paying so much amount to him. Shri Rajinder Kumar then reduced the amount to Rs. 5,500/-. The complainant told his that he should first get his work done and he would pay him the money. Rajinder Kumar did not agree and he insisted that the complainant must part with Rs. 4,000/- in advance by Sunday, i.e. 22-9-1996 and the remaining amount should be paid after 10 days. He would come to the Guest house to collect the amount. On 22-9-1996 Rajinder Kumar again came to the guest house and demanded the bribe. The complainant did not give him any money as demanded by him. However, Shri Rajinder Kumar insisted that the complainant must pay Rs. 1,000/- and that the remaining amount would be collected by him on 23-9-1996. Therefore, the complainant paid him Rs. 1,000/- as bribe on 22-9-1996. It was also stated by the complainant that Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, would come to his Guest house on 23-9-1996 to collect the remaining amount of Rs. 3,000/-. On this, a trap was laid down and the tainted money amount to Rs. 3,000/- was ultimately recovered from Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer.

(3.) Against Shri Vinod Walia petitioner, the case of the prosecution is that he was in conspiracy with his co-accused Shri Rajinder Kumar, and, therefore, he is liable to be prosecuted under Sections 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Sections 12-B of the Indian Penal Code. This aspect of the allegation is being challenged by the petitioner by stating in the petition that he being roped in for false, frivolous and baseless allegations. He is not even remotely connected with the involvement in any agreement and in circumstances it can be said that the petitioner had any link with the alleged demand of bribe made by Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer. He is not directly or indirectlyconcerned with the allegations made by the complainant. The petitioner had marked the application to Shri Rajinder Kumar, Junior Engineer, for re-checking of the meter reading as per the request of the complainant. Thereafter on the written order of the S.D.O. Electricity to the effect "please rectify the bill as per the report of JE and issue M.C.O. to watch the future consumption." the petitioner instructed the ledger keeper to comply with the orders and accordingly the ledger keeper recorded refund entry in the Sundry Register. In such a situation the revised bill to be prepared which is audited by the internal auditor and only then it is signed by the Assistant Revenue Accountant, who was the petitioner. Such a bill was never up to the petitioner for his signature and the alleged revised bill which the C.B.I. took into possession from the complainant did not bear the signature of the petitioner and the same was nothing but a piece of paper without any authenticity.