KALIKA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Counsel appearing for the Vigilance. Petitioner is a Central Government Employee in T.C.I.L. under the ministry of communication and at present Joint General Manager posted at Ahmedabad During the period, 1987 to 2001, he was posted at Patna as Principal, Indira Gandhi Electronics Training Centre. On 20.8.2002, vigilance P.S. Case No. 7 of 2002 was registered by Shri Shiv Kumar Jha, Deputy Superintendent of Police-cum-Officer-in- charge. Vigilance Police Station, Patna on the basis of written report of the same day made by Sri Indira Nand Mishra. Deputy Superintendent of Police (Cabinet) Vigilance Department, Patna.

(2.) The prosecution case disclosed in the First Information Report is that Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, I.A.S., Managing Director, Bihar State Financial Corporation set up two institutions, namely, Samvedna and Green Earth India, with the help of his close persons. He misused his position as Public Servant for his personal benefits and obtained donation from several loanees and entrepreneurs of Bihar State Financial Corporation. He indulged in forgery and destroyed the evidence. In the FIR several persons have been named including the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that on perusal of the details in the FIR in nut-shell allegations levelled against the petitioner is that accounts of income and expenditure was not maintained and the donations received from the various industrialists were spent not for meeting the object of organisation but as per wish of the members. Second allegation is that in conspiracy with the main accused, Ashok Kumar Singh who alongwith persons close to him has floated two organisations and misused his official position to receive the donation from the industrialists connected with Bihar State Financial Corporation. Last allegation is that the petitioner did not cooperate with the investigating agaency as he did not appear for inerrogation in March, 2002.

(3.) Contention of the Counsel for the petitioner is that from perusal of the FIR as well as the charge-sheet it is apparent that Ashok Kumar Singh is in the centre of all allegations and he misused his official power and position for collecting funds in the name of two organisations. So far as the petitioner is concerned, he has not committed any offence for which he can be implicated in the case. His implication is purely on extraneous considerations. Two non-governmental organisations. "Samvedna and Green Earth India" were started on the year, 1994 by Ashok Kumar Singh, IAS. The purpose of the organisation Samvendna was basically to provide relief to the 989 Bhagalpur Riot's victims and to undertaken social work and service for the poor, needy and down trodden as well as provide legal aid to them. The aim of "Green Earth India" was environmental improvement and conservation of natural resources which also in volved plantation and extension of greenery, initially. Ashok Kumar Singh himself was the President of these two organisations and the Secretaries were Devendra Kumar Singh and Mr. Srawan Kumar, Advocate. On 3rd March, 1996, the petitioner joined "Samvedna" as Secretary after being convinced by Ashok Kumaar Singh that it is charitable organisation working for welfare and rehabilitation of 1989 Bhagalpur Riots as well as for the humanity in general. Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh persuaded and convinced the petitioner that he just wanted that some good people should lend their names to the organisation so that these organisations will have goodwill among the people. Petitioner joined as honorary Secretary of "Samvedna" for the purposes of good cause. The organisation was found by charities and donations from individuals and not a single paisa of monetary assistance was ever soughtor received from any Government body either in cash or in kind. In the year, 1995, Ashok Kumar Singh resigned as the President of "Samvedna" and Mr. Ranvijay Kumar was elected in his place. In the year, 1996 the then Secretary. "Samvedna" Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh resigned and the petitioner was elected as new Secretary. On 3.3.1996, petitioner joined as honorary Secretary and continued up to 31.7.2001. So far as the allegation of non-production of account is concerned, the maintenance of accounts was the function of the treasure. It was not possible for the petitioner to give accounts of receipt and disbursement on the relevant date as by that time, the petitioner was fransferred and posted in the border area of Rajasthan. During the period of petitioner's Secretaryship, whatever donations were received, those were invested in mutual fund and bonds in the name of organisation, and this also has been found during the preliminary inquiry of the Vigilance Department. No evidence has been collected showing misappropriation of money by this petitioner or any other members. Money was ever invested in any private accounts. It was not used for personal expenses rather the donation were invested to create a corpus so that prima facie, no case is made out under the offences alleged against the petitioner as no evidence has been collected to indicate that being a Government servant, he misused funds of the organisation. Further submission is that so far the contribution part is concerned, there is no evidence that the organisation received any Government aid or contribution. It was all private individuals who contributed and donated for these two organisations. These contributors have never complained regarding the misuse or defalcation of their contributed money.