Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.1022 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Shaligram Pandey aged about 50 years, son of Sri Markandey Pandey, resident of Road No. 41, Block No.1, Quarter No.3, Gardanibagh Patna, P.S.Gardanibagh, District Patna. 2. Virendra Mahto of Q.No.427/800,L.B.S Nagar, Patna, P.S-.L.B.S. Nagar, Patna, District Patna of Baidnath Mahto, resident son .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna 2. Secretary, Agriculture Deptt., Bihar, Patna 3. Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna 4. District Magistrate, Patna 5. City Superintendent of Police, West, Patna 6. Officer-in-charge, Sachivalya Police Station, Patna 7. Dy. Director (Administration) Agriculture Deptt. Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s Appearance : For the appellants: Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. P. Sinha, G.A.2 ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10 06-05-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned G.A.2 for the State. 2. In the instant application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have
Legal Reasoning
prayed for quashing the FIR as well as entire criminal proceedings arising out of Sachivalaya P.S. Case No.46 of 2007 dated 17th July, 2007 registered under sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is based upon a written complaint made by the Deputy Director (Administration), Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 2 Agriculture Department, Bihar, Patna before the Officer-in-charge of Sachivalaya Police Station on 16th July, 2007, alleging therein, inter alia, that one Prasanna Kumar Sinha, the then Joint Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna had made illegal appointments of twenty two persons on Class-III and Class-IV posts. When the alleged illegal appointments came to the notice of the Agriculture Production Commissioner, Bihar, Patna, he vide his order dated 9th February, 2001, directed the Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna to cancel all those illegal appointments within ten days. 4. It has further been alleged that Nawal Kishore Singh, the then Section Officer, Shaligram Pandey (petitioner no.1), the then Incharge Section Officer and Virendra Mahto (petitioner no.2), the then Assistant, all of whom were posted in the Confidential Section-II of the Agriculture Department, had the responsibility to take steps in respect of cancellation of appointment of illegal appointees but in spite of that they deliberately did not take any action in this regard nor did they inform the Agriculture Production Commissioner for over three years as a result of which four persons remained working upto the month of June, 2007 and withdrew salary causing undue loss to the State.
Legal Reasoning
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 3 that the FIR contains a list of twenty two appointees, who were to be terminated. All the appointments, in question, were made by the then Joint Director Agriculture, Bihar Patna in the year 1994 in between April to October. 6. He further submitted that the petitioners are quite innocent and ingredients of the offence, as alleged in the FIR, are not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the case. He submitted that, as a matter of fact, Sri D.N.Bhagat, the then Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna vide his letter no.10001 dated 9th December, 1994 directed Sri Madan Bihari Sharan, the then successor Joint Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna to cancel those illegal appointments made by Sri Prasanna Kumar Sinha after conducting enquiry into the matter. In compliance of the order of the Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna, the then Joint Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna vide his letter no.566 dated 17th December, 1994 cancelled such appointments and intimated all the Sub-Divisional Agriculture Officers and Assistants Agronomists in this regard. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that all such illegal appointments were cancelled immediately within two months with effect from the date of appointment. However, in the year 2006 one Mr. C.K.Anil, I.A.S., Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 4 was posted as Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna and while reviewing the matter of illegal appointments it transpired to him that out of twenty two illegal appointees, four were still continuing and, as such, he directed the Director Agriculture vide his letter dated 11th July, 2007 to lodge an FIR and, accordingly, the FIR, in question, was instituted. 8. He contended that out of the four appointees, in question, three were already allocated to the State of Jharkhand prior to the issuance of termination order. One of the illegal appointees, namely, Pramod Chandra Jha filed a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.9705 of 2007 before this court challenging the termination order. In the said writ petition, a Bench of this court vide order dated 19th December, 2007, directed the respondents to file a supplementary counter affidavit and while preparing the supplementary counter affidavit, the Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna reconsidered the matter exhaustively and it was found that the alleged four persons were not illegally appointed but they were appointed on compassionate ground. Accordingly, the Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna by a detailed order as contained in memo no.5061 dated 14th July, 2008, cancelled the dismissal order issued by the Joint Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna holding therein that these four persons Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 5 were not illegal appointees but they were appointed on compassionate ground. The said order dated 14th July, 2008, has been brought on record as annesure-5 to this application 9. It has further been contended that the said order dated 14th July, 2008, was also filed along with the supplementary counter affidavit filed before this court in C.W.J.C. No.9705 of 2007 pursuant to which the petitioner of that case Pramod Chandra
Decision
Jha withdrew the writ petition as his grievance stood redressed. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners, thus, submitted that the very foundation on which the present FIR has been instituted has been found to be bad by the respondent State and, as such, allowing the prosecution to continue would amount to an abuse of process of the court. 11. The State has filed two counter affidavits, one on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 3 and the other on behalf of respondent no.6. Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned G.A.2 appearing for the State, fairly conceded that at the time of institution of FIR the fact in issue could not be examined properly but when a counter affidavit in the case of those four persons was being prepared it came to light that the so called illegal appointees were appointed on compassionate ground in place of their deceased father and, accordingly, the Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna vide his order Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 6 dated 14th July, 2008, cancelled the dismissal order issued earlier by the Joint Director Agriculture. He submitted that those persons have been reinstated and they are working. 12. Learned G.A.2 referring to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.1 to 3 contended that the Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna vide his letter no.214 dated 6th February, 2013 declined to grant prosecution sanction against the accused persons. The order refusing sanction to prosecute the petitioners and one another has been brought on record and marked as annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3. 13. Taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the parties, I find that the FIR, in question, was instituted against the petitioner and one another in hot haste without examining the relevant records. The very basis for institution of FIR is that due to inaction of the accused persons, the four so called employees remained working despite their illegal appointment which caused financial loss to the Government. Now, the respondents have come to a finding that those four employees were legally appointed on compassionate ground in place of their deceased father who died in harness. The Director Agriculture, Bihar, Patna has already cancelled their dismissal order and they Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1022 of 2012 (10) dt.06-05-2013 7 have been reinstated and are continuing in service. The respondents have refused the request to grant sanction for prosecution of the petitioners. Under such circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by allowing the investigation of the case to continue. 14. It is true that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rare of the rarest cases. However, in view of the admitted stand of the parties, I find that there is no scope to proceed against the accused persons named in the FIR including the two petitioners. 15. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, I set aside the FIR and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Sachivalaya P.S.Case No. 46 of 2007 dated 17th July, 2007. I make it clear that the prosecution shall stand quashed not only against the petitioners but also against another accused, namely, Nawal Kishore Singh, who is not a party in the present case, as his case also stands on identical footing to that of the two petitioners of the present case. Md.S./- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)