KAN SINGH PARIHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was holding the post of Transport Inspector at Mandar District Sirohi in the year 2012 when the ACB Udaipur organized a raid and inspected the office of Tax Collection at Mandar on 13/10/2012 wherein it was alleged that the petitioner was having an amount of Rs.34,500.00 in his pocket which was duly explained by the petitioner.

(2.) It was stated by the petitioner that the amount of Rs.29,340.00 was the tax collected from the various vehicles with due receipts provided to them and the same was to be deposited in the Treasury. The remaining amount of Rs.5160.00 was the amount which he had withdrawn from ATM for his personal use and medical treatment.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the ACB Authorities while submitting their investigation report observed the aforesaid facts and noted that no case is prima facie made out against the petitioner. The matter was sent to the Assistant Director (Prosecution) and the concerned Assistant Director (Prosecution) has also agreed with the result of the ACB. However, without there being any new facts coming on record, in an autocratic manner, the ACB Authorities sent the matter for prosecution sanction by sending a draft prosecution sanction order and the concerned Appointing Authority has filled the dotted lines without independent application of mind and without even examining the record and report of the ACB.