NEELAM LATA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 9.3.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma whereby and where under cognizance of the offence under Sections 420 and 408 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner and others.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the submissions made on behalf of the parties the fact giving rise this application needs to be notice of. It appears that opposite party No. 2 lodged a complaint alleging therein that when he came to know that a scheme for construction of Morang/soil road from village Jamkati to Pogdanda has been sanctioned, he met petitioner posted as Block Development Officer, Chandwara Block who asked him to meet with the Head Clerk Girja Prasad and the Assistant, Jitendra Kumar and thereupon when he met with those two persons, they asked for money in lieu of appointing him as an agent for execution of the said scheme and thereupon the complainant managed Rs. 30,000/ - which was given to be said Girja Prasad and Jitendra Kumar in presence of two witnesses and then two persons advised the complaint to get an agent nominated for executing the said scheme in the Gram Sabha but due to some unavoidable reason, none could be nominated in the meeting of the Gram Sabha and then they asked for money from the accused persons but the accused persons not only refused to return the money but also abused them. On filing the complaint, statement was taken of the complainant on solemn affirmation and then statement of witnesses were also recorded in course of enquiry. Thereupon cognizance of the offences was taken by the impugned order. Being aggrieved with that, the petitioner has preferred this application.

(3.) AS against this, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 submits that offence alleged is never part of the duty and hence petitioner cannot be said to have done the alleged act in discharging his official duty and therefore, no sanction in terms of Section 197 is required to be accorded before launching the prosecution against the petitioner and that allegation made in the complaint as well as statement made by the complainant in his solemn affirmation and also the statement made by the witnesses in course of enquiry do constitute the offence under which cognizance has been taken.