SANDEEP AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused -petitioner has filed this Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash and set aside the FIR No.316/2009 registered at Police Station ACB, Jaipur for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act). It is to be noted that during the course of pendency of this petition after investigation charge -sheet for the aforesaid offence was filed against the petitioner on 26.6.2014 before the trial Court and now petitioner has also prayed that charge -sheet and the criminal proceedings subsequent thereto may also be quashed and set aside.

(2.) BRIEF relevant facts for the disposal of this petition are that a preliminary inquiry came to be registered on 17.10.2005 against the petitioner and two other persons namely Shri Sandeep Agrawal son of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Agrawal and Shri Rajesh Tinker and on completion of preliminary inquiry aforesaid FIR came to be registered against them on 15.12.2009 for offence under Section 7 of the Act.

(3.) IT is an admitted fact that in the present case trap could not succeed as Shri Rajesh Tinker refused to accept the illegal gratification of Rs.15,000/ - from Shri Vishnu Agrawal. It is also an admitted fact that the ACB itself did not find commission of any offence by Shri Sandeep Agarwal son of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Agarwal, whereas sanction under Section 19 of the Act to prosecute Shri Rajesh Tinker was refused, whereas prosecution sanction was granted to prosecute the petitioner for the aforesaid offence on 14.10.2011 by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Medical and Health Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. As per the first information report and charge -sheet, it has been found by the investigating agency that on 20.02.2008 petitioner was also present alongwith others when samples were from the taken from Aata Factory of Shri Makkhan Lal Sharma and on the basis of alleged conversation between the petitioner and Shri Vishnu Agrawal, it was further found that the demand of gratification was made by the petitioner. The present petition has mainly been filed by the petitioner on the following grounds: -