SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE entire criminal proceeding of Senha P.S. Case No. 70 of 1997 (G.R. No. 515/1997) in which the petitioner is being prosecuted on the charges under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, is being sought to be quashed on the ground of denial to right to speedy justice as the petitioner is being prosecuted for the last more than 10 years.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, while was posted as the Block Development Officer, Senha, was given the authority to select the beneficiaries under Indira Awas Nirman Yojna and to pay advances to them. Village Badla Panchyat, Badla was also selected as a cluster village for providing benefit under the Indira Awas Nirman Yojna.

(3.) IN course of time, several complaints were received to the effect that out of Rs. 4000/ - which was paid to the beneficiaries at the first instance, a sum of Rs. 1000/ - to Rs. 3000/ - had been collected illegally by the middleman. Some of the beneficiaries namely, Naresh Ram, Ramesh Ram and others also lodged the complaint that as soon as the agreement was executed, a cheque of Rs. 4000/ - was given and when it was encashed, Pradip Mahto forcibly took Rs. 1000/ - to Rs. 3000/ - from them on the pretext of supplying bricks, but the bricks were never supplied. When the spot verification was made by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardaga, the amount taken from the beneficiaries, was returned to some of them. Similar allegations were also received from the beneficiaries of Nawatoli, who also complained about taking of the money by one Dhirendra Mandal, Jan Sewak, when they were given Rs. 4000/ - as an advance. On the said allegations, first information report was lodged as Senha P.S. Case No. 70 of 1997. The matter was taken up for investigation. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted on 30/04/1999, against some of the accused persons namely, Dhirendra Mandal, Pradip Mahto and Raj Kumar Mahto. Much thereafter, supplementary charge sheet was submitted against this petitioner under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, upon which cognizance of the offences was taken against him on 10/11/2004. Subsequently, on 31/08/2005, 3rd charge sheet was submitted under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Much thereafter, the charges were framed on 12/11/2008. Till the filing of this case out of 17 witnesses, 7 witnesses had been examined, which, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, is indicative of the fact that the trial has proceeded with speed of snail. It has also been pointed out that the other co -accused, against whom charge sheet has been submitted earlier, when were put on trial, were acquitted way back in the year 2005. Under the circumstances, this case has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.