STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. TEJA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, dated 23rd December, 1988 whereby he held that no ground to frame charge against the accused (Teja Singh respondent) was made out and the said accused was ordered to be discharged in a case registered on the basis of F.I.R. No. 278 dated 7.10.1982 at Police Station City, Hoshiarpur under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1949.

(2.) In brief, facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that Shri Raja Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Hoshiarpur lodged a complaint with Station House Officer, Police Station City, Hoshiarpur on the basis of which aforesaid first information report was registered. According to the said complaint, he had learnt from reliable sources that Teja Singh who was posted as General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Hoshiarpur, in the year 1977-78 was a corrupt official; that he has amassed property and collected money by adopting illegal and corrupt means during his tenure of service from April, 1966 to March, 1979. He had during this period purchased a plot at Hoshiarpur and constructed a house by spending Rs. 77,000/- and also purchased properties in Hoshiarpur in his name or in the name of other members of his family. During this period, his assessed income was Rs. 1,59,260/- whereas he spent Rs. 2,36,525/-. Thus amount spent by him exceeded his known sources of income by Rs. 77,318/-. Hence, Teja Singh by collecting money by illegal and corrupt sources has committed an offence punishable under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. After completion of the investigation, final report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was submitted in the trial Court. After hearing the counsel for the parties, the Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, vide his impugned order, discharged the counsel holding that no ground to frame charge against the accused in this case made out.

(3.) Mrs. S.K. Bhatia, A.A.G. Punjab, appearing on behalf of the State Submitted that bar created under Rule 2.2 contained in Chapter II of Volume II of the Punjab Civil Service Rules relates to regulate the release, withholding or withdrawing of the pension only and is not in any way attracted to the commission of an offence under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Reliance in this respect was placed on an authority of the Apex Court in State of Punjab v. Kailash Nath, 1989 1 RCR(Cri) 139, wherein it was observed as under :-