DR. ASHOK SINGHVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, Dr. Ashok Singhvi, by the instant misc. petition, under Section 482 read with Section 483 Cr.P.C. of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ' Cr.P.C .'), has prayed for quashing FIR No.251/15, registered at Police Station ACB, District Jaipur, Charge-sheet No.276/2015 and the entire proceedings in Case No.234/15, pending before Sessions Judge (Anti Corruption), Udaipur.

(2.) Succinctly stated, the facts relevant and germane to the matter are that petitioner was selected in Indian Administrative Services of 1983 Batch and allotted Rajasthan Cadre. Since inception of his career as a bureaucrat uptil September 2015, spanning service career for about 32 years, he has served the State Government in various capacities. Boosting his honesty, integrity and administrative capabilities, petitioner has pleaded in the petition that during his service tenure he has earned many accolades and his uprightness was acknowledged by Government, his peers and subordinates. It is further averred in the petition that for a short stint from 2012 to 2014 he remained on deputation with Central Government as Joint Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development. At the behest of State Government, he was repatriated to parent cadre in Rajasthan in the year 2014 and after repatriation, he was deputed as Principal Secretary, Mines Department, the department with which he worked earlier for three years from 2005 to 2008. Highlighting his performance in the interregnum period between 2005 to 2008 with the Mines Department, petitioner has averred that he made sincere endeavour for augmenting the revenues of said department, streamlined mineral policy and introduced DMA online system with many innovative ideas in the best interest of department and the State of Rajasthan. While referring to his one year's second tenure with the Mines Department as Principal Secretary, petitioner has averred in the petition that within a span of one year he inked many MOUs for mineral prospecting and explorations, which paved the way for huge investment in mining and petroleum sectors in Rajasthan.

(3.) Concentrating on the principal grievances, petitioner has pleaded that abrupt coercive actions taken on 16.09.2015 by the ACB sleuths, when he was returning from Secretariat after attending meeting, and then taking into custody gave him rude shock. As per petitioner's version, simultaneous actions were undertaken by the ACB officials by seizure of computers, files etc. without any search warrant or authorization. In follow of actions, petitioner was taken to his official residence, already under control of ACB Personnel, and then extensive search operation was carried out to every nook & corner of the residence. The search operation lasted till morning of the next day. Petition also unfurls that finally the petitioner was taken to ACB Headquarters without furnishing him grounds of arrest and sans recording reasons in clear negation of the directions of Supreme Court in case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar [(2014) 8 SCC 273].