RAMESH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner by the medium of instant petition preferred under Sec. 561-A [now Sec. 482 Cr.pc] of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred as to the Code") has assailed order dtd. 30/7/2013 rendered by the Court of Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge (Anti-Corruption) Jammu, whereby, charges have been framed against the petitioner in FIR No. 21/2010 under Ss. 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act r/w Ss. 420, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, RPC in case titled State of J&K Vs. Babu Ram & Ors.,

(2.) Aggrieved of and dissatisfied with the impugned order dtd. 30/7/2013, petitioner has assailed it's legality, propriety and correctness and has sought it's quashment on the following grounds:-

(3.) Respondent has sought the dismissal of the petition on the grounds, that none of the constitutional, legal or statutory rights of petitioner have been infringed or violated by the answering respondent which is sine-qua-non for invoking the writ jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Court. It is contended, that no cause of action has accrued to the petitioner to file the present writ petition, the writ petition is grossly misconceived and being without any legal foundation merits outright dismissal, the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands as there is suppression as well concealment of material facts from the court, the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts which cannot be decided in a writ petition for which the petitioner cannot take the recourse to the remedy under the writ jurisdiction of this court. It is stated, that the petitioner alongwith other officials was entrusted with huge stock of food grains, and in a well knit conspiracy with each other dishonestly misappropriated and embezzled the food grains by not only manipulating the records and committing forgery, cheating and criminal breach of trust causing huge loss to state exchequer in the sum of ? 74, 07,370.13/- but subsequent gains to themselves. It is moreso contended, that the petitioner alongwith two more accused namely, Babu Ram and T.P. Singh have been prosecuted vide sanction accorded by the Govt. order No. 46-GAD (Vig) 2012 dtd. 23/11/2012, the trial court has passed well reasoned impugned order for framing charges against accused/petitioner after perusal of the charge sheet under Sec. 173(2) Cr.pc r/w statements of the prosecution witnesses and documents annexed therein, and there is sufficient material on record to presume that petitioner/accused has committed the offences alleged against him.