TAFAZUL HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated April 7, 1984 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara by which the petitioner was charge sheeted u/s. 409 read with sections 420, 465 and 468 I. P. C. in connection with the famine relief work for nursery in the year 1973. A complaint was filed by Rameshwarsingh Kachroo and Ramnarain before the Deputy Superintendent of Police Anti Corruption Department, Chittorgarh against Dhruv Narain, the then Block Development Officer (for short 'b. D. O. ' hereinafter) alleging that a false document in the form of muster roll was prepared and irregularities were committed in the work. The petitioner was an Overseer concerned with that work. The matter was investigated and sanction for prosecution of Dhruv Narain was sought from the Government but the same was refused on the ground that though irregularities were evident in the construction work, no case of any embezzlement was made out and that the ingredients of dishonesty in committing irregularities in the form of using trucks instead of engaging labour for transporting the construction material was lacking in the case. The investigating agency was of the opinion that no case is made out against the B. D. O. and the Overseer because it was a case of irregularities and not of dishonesty or misappropriation of money. As such final report in the case was filed in the Court on May 25, 1981. The learned Magistrate, as evident from the endorsement dated June 16, 1981 on the final report, considered it to be a fit case in which the charge sheet against Dhruv Narain and Tafazul Hussain should have been filed and as such did not accept the final report and sent the papers to the S. H. O. Police Station Gadi on July 10, 1982 for compliance.

(2.) AFTER lapse of a period of about two years, on July 27, 1983 Police filed a challan against petitioner Tafazul Hussain. The petitioner raised objection about the competence of the Court for taking cognizance against him. The contention of the petitioner did not find favour with the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and he, vide impugned order dated April 7, 1984 held that it was a case in which petitioner Tafazul Hussain should be charge sheeted. Consequently petitioner was charge sheeted under section 409, 420, 465 and 468 I. P. C. on April 11, 1984.