LAWS(HPH)-2011-5-170

DEVINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On May 23, 2011
DEVINDER KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been preferred by the petitioner herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer that FIR No. 4 dated 2.8.2010, under Sections 429/120-B IPC and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, registered with Police Station, Anti Corruption Zone, Shimla and the order passed by the learned Special Judge(Forest), Shimla on 2.8.1010 (Annexure P-8) summoning the accused for 15.9.2010 may be quashed.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence. Detailed submissions have been made by the learned Counsel as to how initially in the First Information Report the name of the petitioner does not figure and lateron he has been summoned as an accused. The ground urged is that while passing the order Annexure P-8, the Court did not consider that the building has been leased out by following the proper procedure. There was a valid lease deed between the University and the petitioner. More importantly, it is urged that it is the allegation that the building was hired by the University in violation of the norms in connivance with S/Shri S.D. Sharma, O.P. Saraswat, Dr. Yogender Verma, Dr. S.K. Garg and J.B. Nadda, but these persons barring Shri S.D. Sharma have not been charged and arrayed as accused. The other accused have been left out on the ground that no prosecution sanction has been granted. Learned Counsel then urges that the trial Court did not consider the fact that the FIR was registered in the year 2003 and Shri S.D. Sharma was arrested and bailed out, and at that particular point of time nobody felt the need of either arresting/arraying the petitioner as an accused.

(3.) In support of her contentions that the FIR is nothing but an abuse of the process of Court, learned Counsel relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. M. Devendrappa and another, 2002 AIR(SC) 671. In this case, the State of Karnataka has challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court quashing the proceedings initiated against the respondent. After considering the ambit of the powers of the Court, on the settled principles of law the Court held:-