RAKESH MEHANDIRATTA (ARORA) Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the present criminal misc petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, the complainantSurendra Kumar had filed a written complaint dtd. 20/10/2014 before Anti Corruption Bureau, Hanumangarh with 33 allegations for the period in which the petitioner was holding the post of Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh. In the written complaint it was stated that the petitioner while holding the post of Executive Officer, Nagar Palika at Pilibanga, with the collusion of the property dealers, issued commercial and residential patta in utter disregard to the applicable laws and thereby caused huge financial losses to the Nagar Palika for his personal gains.

(3.) Learned Counsel submitted that the impugned FIR No. 245/2018 dtd. 29/8/2018 has been lodged against the present petitioner for the offences under Ss. 13(1)(c)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Ss. 467, 468, 471, 409 and 120-B of the IPC, specifically for four allegations which were levelled against the petitioner by the complainant in his written complaint dtd. 20/10/2014. Drawing attention of the Court towards the impugned FIR No. 245/2018 and the averments, made therein, learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that for the same set of allegations, different FIR Nos. 407/2014, 408/2014, 598/2015, 672/2014 and 661/2014 were lodged against the present petitioner and in each of them, after making a thorougBureau, District Hanumangarh on the basis of the written complaint submitted by the complainant, on same set of facts is illegal and not justified. It was submitted that the fresh investigation by the investigating agency without there being any change in the facts or circumstances is absolutely unwarranted and illegal. In support of his arguments, learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the following judgments: decided on 22/7/2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973--Sec. 482--Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988--Secs. 13(1)(c)(a) and 13(2)--Penal Code, 1860--Secs. 467, 468, 471, 409 and 120B--Petition to quash the F.I.R.--Contention that various F.I.Rs.were lodged for the same allegation and after thorough investigation police submitted the negative Final Report-- All allegations raised in the F.I.R. has been thoroughly investigated and submitted negative Final Report--Held, F.I.R. is deserves to be quashed. h investigation, negative Final Reports were submitted by the concerned Investigating Officers.