MOHAN LAL PUROHIT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 29.09.2011 whereby the charge for the offence under section 13(1) (d) read with section 12(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sections 109, 409 & alternatively 409/120B Penal Code have been farmed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is basically for supervisory negligence of construction of the Chambal Bridge. The design of the bridge was given, in which distance between two pillars was to be maintained at 105 meters. At one pillar, it was kept 135 meters and the next pillar it was kept at the distance of 75 meters only. On account of it, the loss of Rs. 32.80 lacs was sustained by the Government. For supervision of the work, the team was evolved. The petitioner was holding the post of Resident Engineer on deputation with the Rajasthan State Bridge Construction Corporation at Dholpur. There exists no allegation for personal gain or acceptance of bribe or even demand of bribe. Thus, an offence under section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act is not made out. The offence under section 109/409 Penal Code is also not made out because it is not a case where there is breach of trust. In view of the above, the order framing charges may be set aside. A reference of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State, Represented by Inspector of Police Vs. A. Parthiban [(2006) 11 SCC 473] has been given.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has supported the order and submitted that due to negligence of the petitioner and for his personal gain, the charges have rightly been framed vide impugned order. It may thus, not be interfered. It is more so when due to supervisory negligence for personal gain, heavy loss was caused to the Government. Thus, the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act so also the Penal Code are made out.