AVRENDRA KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order dated 22/01/2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -X - -cum -Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad, in R.C. Case No. 12(A) of 2009 -D, whereby and whereunder, the application filed under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was rejected.

(2.) THE case of the CBI is that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was executed in between the representative of Director General, Resettlement, New Delhi and the then G.M. (Production) of Coal India Limited, Kolkata on 16/04/1999, with an aim of having union free captive transport organizations in coal subsidiaries and for providing an opportunity to ex -servicemen for resettlement. The terms and conditions as stipulated under MOU, on amongst others, are that initial contract shall be valid for 5 years from the date of commencement of the work. Renewal of contract for another term of 4 years may be considered by both the parties jointly provided the past performance and functioning of the ESM Company has been satisfactory; all the tippers and loaders will be owned by the eligible Ex -Service Men (ESM), widows/disabled/dependents of entitled ESM or the ESM Company. Hire purchase is permissible but hiring of loaders and tippers is not permitted and that the DGR should evolve a system to ensure compliance of MOU provisions regarding deployment of ex -servicemen, their vehicles, their payments and the constitution of Board of Directors. In case DGR finds anything in variance with the MOU, his office will inform the CIL and initiate suitable action and that all ESM Company will submit a half yearly and annual return so as to reach DGR by 30th July and 30th January respectively, without fail. Aim of these reports is to check deployment of vehicles/equipments, percentage of ESM, detecting irregularities, if any, and to monitor the progress of ESM Company by DGR. Non submission of specified reports of incorrect facts/figures may result in cancellation of sponsorship/non -renewal of the contract and that specific/relevant portion of the reports concerning the coal subsidiary will be authenticated by the authorized representative of the coal subsidiary and that ESM Company will deploy a minimum of 75% of local regular employees as ESM within 6 months of commencement of work.

(3.) ON the aforesaid allegations, the charge sheet was submitted, alleging therein that the petitioner and others committed offence punishable under sections 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Upon it, the Court took cognizance of the aforesaid offences vide its order dated 29/09/2010. That order was challenged before this Court in Cr. M.P. No. 1198 of 2012, which was permitted to be withdrawn with a liberty to raise all those points, which have been raised in the said application, at the time of framing of charge or at the stage of discharge. Pursuant to that order, an application under Section 239 Cr.P.C. was filed, which was rejected vide order dated 22/01/2015, which is under challenge.