GUMAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application-in-revision filed by Guman Singh against an order of the Special Judge for C B 1. Cases, Rajasthan, Jaipur, dated 31st Oct., 1975, by which objections raised by the petitioner to the taking of cognizance of an offence punishable under section 165, I P.C against him were overruled and it was ordered -hat a charge for the aforesaid offence may be framed against him on the basis of the three allegations mentioned in the charge-sheet by the C.B I.

(2.) The relevant facts giving rise to this revision petition may be briefly stated as follows:

(3.) The petitioner was posted as Superintendent of Police, Sirohi, during the period between July 19F5 and Aug., 1969. Thereafter he was appointed on the post of :he Deputy Inspector General of Police at Kota, where he work-d on the said post during the period between 31-1.1970 and 14.4-1972. It is alleged that being a public servant he obtained a plot of land situated at Mount Abu in the year 1965 for Rs. 99.00, from the Ex ,Maharaja of Sirohi in the name of his son Dhanpat Singh while knowing it well that the market value of the plot was between Rs. 15,000.00. and Rs. 20,000/ . It was further alleged that in the year 1966 he purchased 1292 Bighas of land at Gulab Ganj from Shri Ram Singh, brother of Ex-Maharaja of Sirohi for Rs. 8,000.00, on 28-9-1966 in the name. of his grind daughter Kumari Chandra Kana. While purchasing this land he knew it well that the market value thereof was about Rs. 20,000/ , on the date of the Sale. On 31-3-71 he again purchased 9 Bighas of land in the name of his son Dhanpat Singh for a consideration, i.e. Rs. 9,000.00, which he knew to be inadequate, from the Ex. Maharaja of Kota. The market price of this land was more than Rs. 2,000.00, per Bigha. An inquiry into these transfers was made which revealed that the Ex-Mahtraja of Sirohi and his brother Ram Singh and the Ex- Maharaja of Kota, from whom the lands were purchased by the petitioner for consideration which he knew to be inadequate, were concerned in proceedings or business transacted or about to be transacted by the petitioner in the capacity of a public servant and were having connections with the official functions of the petitioner or were interested in or related to the persons concerned in the proceedings or business transacted or about to be transacted by the petitioner in the following manner: