BHIKAM SINGH GUJAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as also learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) This Criminal Revision petition has been preferred to assail the order dated 9.10.2017 passed by learned Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, Bharatpur in Sessions Case No. 4/2013, whereby charge for the offences under Section 7, 13(1), (d), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B IPC have been framed against the present petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no allegation of demand being made by the petitioner. No trap proceeding was conducted qua petitioner. The petitioner has been involved in the matter without any basis, only on the ground that in the transcription memo some conversation is said to have taken place between the petitioner and complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that despite the fact that demand was verified on 28.11.2011, FIR came to be lodged after three days, on 01.12.2011. He has drawn attention of this Court in this regard to the judgment rendered in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1, wherein it has been held that no preliminary inquiry is permissible and if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence, immediate registration of FIR is mandatory. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that delay in registration of FIR is also fatal to prosecution case. Hence, the order framing charge against the petitioner may be quashed and set aside.