R.S. KHANDELWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been preferred against the order dated 22.2.95 passed by the learned Special Judge for Anti Corruption Department Case, Jaipur, by which he ordered to frame charge for the offences under sections 420, 120-B, 471 and 468 Penal Code and Under section 5(1 )(d) read with Sec. 5(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (in short 'the Act') and the charges framed on 14.3.95 in pursuance thereof against the accused petitioners.

(2.) Succinctly stated, the relevant facts are that in the basis of a news paper item publishing in 'Hindustan Times' dated 31st July, 1984 regarding the irregularities in purchase of Portable Stone Crusher Shri G.C. Rai, Dy.S.P ACD, Bundi after conducting preliminary enquiry submitted report dated 23.3.87, whereupon FIR No. 33/1987 for offences Under sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 120-B Penal Code and under section 5(1 )(a) with Sec. 5(2) of the Act was registered at ACD Out Post, Bundi against petitioner R.S. Khandelwal. Executive Engineer Irrigation Department, Sub-Division, Tonk. However after completion of investigation, a challan was filed on 9.6.92 in the court of learned Special Judge, ACD cases, Jaipur. Briefly the allegation against the petitioners is that sometime in March, 1979 they were party to a Criminal conspiracy to defraud the Government, that in pursuance to the said criminal conspiracy petitioner R.S. Khandelwal floated a short term notice dated 3.3.79 inviting tenders for the purchase of one portable stone crusher and its screening plant of jaw crusher, whereupon as many as eleven tenders were received by the stipulated dated i.e. 19.3.79. The lowest offer was of a firm from Gujarat. The next lower tender was that of M/s. Forgewell and Engineering Corporation, New Delhi for an amount of Rs. 63,990.00 with the stipulation to supply the goods within seven days and a one years guarantee against any manufacturing defect from the date of supply. Petitioner R.S. Khandelwal, after scrutiny of the tenders, by his letter dated 30.3.79 recommended to the Superintending Engineer (Irrigation), Ajmer that the tender of M/s. Forgewell Engineering Corporation, New Delhi be accepted. The S.E. had already issued sanction for the purchase of Portable Crusher by his letter dated 8.3.79. It is alleged that the notice inviting tenders was published only in news paper 'Rajasthan Patrika' and that the same was not sent for publication in 'Nav Bharat Times', 'Hindustan Times' wid 'Rastradoot' news papers. However, it was wrongly shown in the despatch register that the Nil was also sent for publication in the aforementioned news papers. It is alleged that petitioner R.S. Khandelwal placed a purchase order with M/s. Forgewell Engineering Corporation on 24.3.1979 without proper budget, estimate, sanction and without identifying the quarry and the site and even without depositing the earnest money from the said firm. Thus he superseded the Government procedure and practice prevalent in the department regarding inviting and opening tenders, it is alleged that before placing the supply order with M/s. Forgewell Engineering Corporation, the credibility of the said firm was also not ascertained. Shri R.S. Khandelwal released 75% payment amounting to Rs. 48,852.20 in advance on the basis of the RR and consignment documents and further released the remaining 25% amounting to Rs. 14,657.40 after deducting the earnest money amount of Rs. 2000.00 without testing the operation of the Crusher simply on the basis of a false certificate issued by the petitioner Om Prakash Mathur, who was at that time posted as Assistant Engineer (Irrigation), Sub-Division, Tonk and Hanuman Sahai-Mechanic. It is further alleged that the said Crusher had a crack in the chamber block of the Engine, which was detected by later on and that the said Crusher could operate only for two hours sometime in Sept., 1981. Subsequently in Sept., 1983 the said Crusher was declared surplus and the same was transferred and credited to the accounts of 'Pachna Project' for an amount of Rs. 66,519.60. It is therefore, alleged that the petitioners have committed forgery for the purpose of cheating, and cheated the State Government having entered in to a criminal conspiracy and in the capacity of a public servant dis-honestly committed offence under section 5(1)(d) read with Sec. 5(2) of the Act.

(3.) On 20.7.92, the accused petitioners filed an application before the learned Special Judge praying that report of the Chief Engineer (Irrigation) in respect of the enquiry conducted by him regarding the purchase of the said crusher, the reply of the State Government filed before the Public Accounts Committee as also the report of the Public Accounts Committee dated 5.2.92 regarding the alleged irregularity/illegality for the purchase of the Portable Crusher be sent for. The Public Prosecutor for ACD did not oppose the said application. The learned Presiding Officer by his order dated 20.7.92 allowed the said application sent for the aforementioned record. In compliance thereof, the enquiry report of Shri B.P. Bhatnagar, Chief Engineer (Irrigation), Rajasthan, Jaipur, the reply of the Irrigation Department, Government of Rajasthan submitted before the Public Accounts Committee regarding the audit objection para No. 5.4 raised by the Accountant General, (Controller of Accounts), and the recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee in respect of the purchase of the Portable Crusher in question were submitted by the Assistant Secretary, Irrigation Department. Government of Rajasthan before the trial court.