PRITAM SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the charges framed against him by the Special Judge, Solan and Sirmur Districts, on 18th October, 1979,

(2.) IN order to appreciate the facts of the case, it is desirable to reproduce the report made against the petitioner by the Delhi Special Police Establishment. Ambala Branch, as contained in the application: Information: Information has been received that Sh. Pritam Singh while posted as Income-tax Officer at Simla during the year 1974-75 was dealing with the Income-tax assessment cases of M/s. Mohan Meakins Breweries, Solan involving large amount of Income-tax relating to the assessment year 1973 74. It is alleged that Shri Pritam Singh, during the pendency of the said assessment case accepted. hospitality from the said assesses firm in the form of his stay in Hotels at Chail, Kasauli, Delhi and Luck-now with his wife/family at the cost of the said assessee firm which incurred heavy expenditure towards the entertainments of Shri Pritam Singh and family on various occasions. It is further alleged that in the month of December, 1074, Shri Pritam Singh visited Mohan Nagar, Ghazlabad in connection with the said Income-tax assesses firm had arranged for their bording and lodging at Janpath and Akbar Hotel, New Delhi besides keeping a car at their disposal during the relevant period. It is further alleged that Shri Pritam Singh claimed TA from the Government for his journey from Simla to Delhi and back and Simla to Lucknow and back and thereby obtained a sum of Rupees 337. 80 P. and Rs. 447. 00 respectively and that he was on tour from 9-9-1974 to 19-9-1974 to Solan wherefrom he went to Chail and stayed there from 14-9-1974 to 15-91974. Shri Pritam Singh thus misused his official position as public servant and thereby committed offence of cheating coupled with the offences punishable Under Section 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1947. The above facts prima facie make out a case punishable under Section 420, I. P. C. and Section 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) P. C. Act, 1947. An RC therefore is registered and investigation entrusted to Shri Girdhar Gopal Inspector: SPE/ambala. A challan was put up in the court of Special Judge, Solan and Sirmur Districts and the learned Judge after perusing the documents framed the following charges against the petitioner:

(3.) IT has been frankly conceded by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there is some material on record to warrant the framing of, charges, in respect of the first two items of the charge-sheet. He has, however, strongly contended that there is no material on record to justify the charge" for the, third, item, that is, regarding obtaining pecuniary advantage to the tune of Rs. 340/-in the shape of air travel charges, from Lucknow to Delhi, from Mohan Meakins Breweries (in short, called the Company ). Accodringly, he has confined his arguments to this charge alone. The learned Counsel has drawn my attention to the evidence on record on the basis of which the said charge is intended to be established. I have examined the record and have also heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties. It is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the respondent that this charge is to be established on the basis of the statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal procedure of S/shri V. P. Goel, R. K. Raizada and Prem Mohan, besides some documents. In his statement Shri V. P. Goel, who is Station Manager, Indian Air Lines, Lucknow, has stated on the basis of the record, that as per passenger list of flight of 28th February, 1975, one Mr. P. Singh along with Mrs. Singh had travelled from Lucknow to Delhi against tickets Nos. 7233678 and 7233679, along with one infant. The above tickets, according to him, were issued on 27th February, 1975. The witness, however, showed his inability to state the name of the person who purchased these tickets. It is further stated by him that Mr. P. Singh was carrying 58 Kgs. luggage against the permissible limit of 40 Kgs, against two tickets. Rest of 18 Kgs. was adjusted with one Shri P. Mohan who was also travelling by the same flight. The other relevant witness is Mr, R. K. Raizada, Accountant, of the Company at Lucknow. It is stated by him that he had seen voucher No. 70 dated 3-3-1975 for Rs. 344. 60 P. He has further stated that he had submitted the bill which contained his signatures. He has also stated that he had purchased two air tickets from Lucknow to Delhi for the guests of the Company, for Rs. 340/- on some date during 25-2-1975 to 2-3-1975. He has further stated that he did not remember the names of the guests for whom the air tickets were purchased. Another witness whose statement is relevant to the matter in issue, is Shri Prem Mohan. He has stated that during February, 1975 he was on official visit to Lucknow and that he met Mr. Pritam Singh, Income-tax Officer, in his factory at Lucknow, who had come there for making some enquiries. He has further stated that he came in contact with Pritam Singh for the first time when he was introduced to him by Mr. Yogesh Kumar. He has also stated that on 28-2-1975 he travelled by Indian Air Lines plane in the evening, from Luckow to Delhi. Shri Pritam Singh, Income-tax Officer, arrived at the Air Port by a car, along with his wife and a child of about a year or so, and that all of them travelled by the same plane. I have also seen the voucher submitted by Shri R. K. Raizada. In the voucher it is not indicated when the air tickets were purchased. The numbers of such tickets are also not given in the voucher.