PRAVEEN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE six miscellaneous petitions are directed against the order dated August 10, 1990, passed by the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Department Cases, Bikaner by which the learned Special Judge framed the charges against the petitioner.

(2.) SUPERINTENDENT of Police Anti-corruption Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, lodged a First Information Report on February 15, 1983, at Police Station, Anti-corruption Department, Bikaner, against accused petitioners Harisingh Bhati, Jaspal Suri, Mukat Biharilal Mathur, Ramesh Kumar, Praveen Kumar Chawla, Inder Singh Thekedar of M/s Jaikarni General Store and Devendra Singh Contractor. It was stated in the First Information report that Shri Hari Singh Bhati Executive Engineers, Bailor Division, R. C. P. CAD Bikaner, Shri Mukat Behari Lal Mathur, Assistant Engineer RD 66, B. L. D. J. P. Shri Assistant. Engineer, R. D. 112 C. A. D. Pungal Branch, Joint Ehgineers -Ramesh Kumar Chawla and Devendra Kumar Jakkhar alongwith Indra Singh of M/s. Jaikarni General Stores, Bikaner and Devendra Singh of Rawat Theka Sabkari Samiti; conspired together and fraudulently changed the cement at Lalgarh Railway Station, which came from the factory and in its place, replaced the building materia! and sent this building material in place of the cement at the stores of Ballarpur Sub-Division at R. D. 66 BLD and R. D. 112 Pugal Branch (PB ). In this way, they caused illegal loss to the State Govt. That building material, which was received at these two stores, is still available there. A compaint regarding the receipt of such low-quality of cement was so also received from Shri H. C. Gupta, Chairman, Overseers Association. Similar complaints were, also made by the contractors who were doing the construction work in that area, but Shri Singh Bhati, Executive Engineer, who was the Inch-arge of the Division, did not take any action. It was also, mentioned in the First Information Report that the cement, which was received from the factory was kept at the Railway Station, Lalgarh, by Shri Hari Singh Bhati for a considerably long time with an intention to change the same and, therefore, he extended the limit of carriage provided under the contract. On the basis of this report, a case under Sections 120-B and 420 IPC as well as under Sections 5 (1 ) (d) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against the above mentio-ned accused petitioners. After registration of the First Information Report, the Additional SUPERINTENDENT of Police, Anti-corruption Department, Bikaner, conducted the investigations and presented the challan against Hari Singh Bhati Executive Engineer, Jaspal Sun, Assistant Engineer, Mukat Bihari Lal Mathur, Assistant Engineer, Ramesh Kumar Chawla, Junior Engineer, Praveen Kumar Jakkhar, Junior Engineer, Shaukat Ali Junior Engineer, Bheem Singh Chowki-dar, Hukam Singh Chowkidar, Mustaq Chowkidar and Inder Singh of M/s. Jaikarni General Stores, Bikaner, in the Special Judge, Anti-corruption Cases, Bikaner under-Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 477, 120-B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 5 (l) (d) read with Section 5 2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Alongwith the challan, the police presented 108 documents and, also submitted the statement of 42 witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr. PC. The learned Special Judge, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the accused-petitioners, by his order dated August 10, 1990, framed the charges against the accused. It is against this order, framing the charges against the accused-petitioners that the present six miscellaneous petitions have been filed by the petitioners.

(3.) S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 8 of 1991 (Inder Singh V The State of Rajasthan) has been filed by Inder Singh Contractor, who is one of the partners in M/s. Jaikarni General Stores, Bikaner, and against whom charg-es under Section 120-B and 420 and in the alternative under Sec. 420/109 and 467 IPC have been framed. It is contended by the learned counsel for the peti-tioner Indersingh that no case from the evidence collected by the investigating agency during investigation, has been made-out against the petitioner. The petitioner carried the cement from Lalgarh Railway Station to the Stores of R. D. 66 BID. and RD-112 P. B. and whatever material was given to the petiti-oner, that was carried to these stores. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is no link-evidence qua the petitioner connecting him with the crime. He has, also, submitted that no case for framing the charges under Section 467 IPC is made-out against him. Lastly, he submitted that there is no evidence on record, from which it could be gathered that the petitioner made supplies of Spurious cement at the stores. The learned coursed for the petitioner therefore, prayed that the charges framed against the petitioner Inder Singh may be quashed. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has supported the learned lower Court, framing the charges against the petitioner.