TARSEM LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Section 497 -A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest for offences under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Jammu and Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt. 2006, and Sections 120 -B, 466, 468 and 471 of the Ranbir Penal Code, registered under FIR No. 30/2014, with the Vigilance Organisation, Jammu. The allegations against the petitioner are that he, in connivance with others, by abusing his official position, granted illegal and undue benefit to undeserving candidates and selected them for Class TV posts. It is stated that the petitioner as a part of the selection Committee had selected approximately 90 candidates against the aforementioned posts in the Education department out of which at least 15 candidates had not at all filed their application forms before the Zonal Education Officer concerned, as per the advertisement notice. These selections thus, are stated to be back -door appointments.

(2.) APART from this, in regard to 13 selected candidates, it is alleged that the marks were fraudulently raised with a view to confer undue benefit on them. It is further alleged that at least, six candidates were either given less marks by the Interview Committee or were shown as absent but subsequently, their points were fraudulently raised which led to their selection. Besides this, it has been alleged that the petitioner had violated the relevant Government orders fixing the criteria according to which, the selection was to be made and marks allocated for, viva there -under.

(3.) MR . B.S. Salathia, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner urged that the petitioner was sought to be implicated falsely in the aforementioned case on account of political vendetta. It was urged that there were four members in the select Committee, which included Principal DIET; District Social Welfare Officer; Assistant Director Employment, besides the petitioner in his capacity as a Chief Education Officer. It was further urged that the other members of the Committee were not being questioned by the investigating officer.