PREM KUMAR SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Central Bureau of Investigation.

(2.) THIS is a petition for quashing the order, dated 29.01.2013, passed in Special Case No. 1 of 2009 arising out of R.C. 1(A) of 2009, by the Special Judge, III, Patna, by which the petition of the petitioner, dated 12.11.2012, under Section 239 of the Criminal Procedure Code for discharge, has been rejected.

(3.) A petition has been filed under Section 239 of the Criminal Procedure Code for discharge of the petitioner. The trial Court after taking into consideration the submissions of the parties that the charge sheet has been submitted without proper investigation. The petitioner did not supervise the preparation of the bill of the Loco Shed Department. There is no evidence on record of meeting of mind of the petitioner with other accused persons. No offence is made out of the evidence collected under the Penal Code or under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The further submission that sanction has been obtained from unauthorized authority who has not applied his mind to the effect and circumstance and the material collected during the investigation. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Vaishali at Hajipur, is the proper authority for sanction. The excess bill never passed through the petitioner and the signature were fake and the witnesses have stated that the bill used to be prepared by Dilip Kumar, co -accused, through computer system in centralized manner and only the Electronic Data Process Center is required to check the bill and not the Officer of the Personnel Department. The Court is not required to accept the opinion of the prosecution agency at the time of framing of charge, but, required to look the material collected. There is no material for conspiracy, taking into consideration the submission and contra argument by the Central Bureau of Investigation that admittedly a fraud has been committed. The petitioner was the Office Superintendent of the Pay Bill Section and was responsible for creating preparation and raising of the pay bill under the supervision of Office Superintendent. The further fact that Smt. Chandra Pandey was under the Office Superintendent has already signed the bill. The petitioner is not required to be removed by the Government and so the sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code is not applicable.