1 - Dwarka Prasad Verma S/o Lt. Shri D.R. Verma Aged About 55 Years v. 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Mainpur, District- Gariyaband
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:7636-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 544 of 2025 1 - Dwarka Prasad Verma S/o Lt. Shri D.R. Verma Aged About 55 Years R/o- Janta Colony, Gudhiyari Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Kishore Kumar Dubey S/o Lt. Bhagwat Prasad Dubey Aged About 62 Years R/o Daldal Shivni Road, Dubey Colony, Mowa, P.S.- Mowa, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Mainpur, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) 2 - The Block Medical Officer Mainpur Block, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Senior Advocate
Legal Reasoning
For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate assisted by Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Date: 2025.02.17 10:40:16 +0530 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Chief Justice , Judge Hon'ble Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Decision
Order on Board 13 .0 2 .202 5 1. Heard Mr. Y.C. Sharma, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Sachin Nidhi, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr.S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents. 2 2. The present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS has been filed by the petitioners seeking following reliefs : “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash :- i) F.I.R. No. 54/2024 dated 18.05.2024, registered at Police Station Mainpur, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) for the offence U/s-120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. ii) Chargesheet No.61/2024 dated 22.08.2024 filed before the Court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offence U/s-420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120B I.P.C. arising out of crime no.54/2024. iii) The Cognizance order dated 24.08.2024 taken by the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate in a Criminal Case No. 817/2024 for the offence U/s-420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120B I.P.C. with all the consequential proceedings in a criminal case no.817/2024.” 3. As per case of the prosecution, Complainant Gajendra Singh Dhruv (Block Medical officer of Mainpur Block) lodged a written report in the Mainpur police station on 18.05.2024 to the effect that under the Community Health Center Mainpur, between the financial year 2016-17 to the financial year 2019-20 (continuously for a total of 04 years), 11 officers/employees have prepared fake bills in the treasury through BTR, Bearer Cheque, forged handwritten seal and illegally withdrawn and embezzled a total government amount of Rs.3,13,43,971 / (Three crore thirteen lakh forty-three thousand nine hundred seventy one rupees only) from 3 the public account of the State. On the above written report of the Complainant, Mainpur police station has registered a crime against the Petitioners under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120B IPC under crime number 54/2024. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) having charge-sheet No. 61/2024 on 22.08.2024 against 10 accused persons including the present petitioners. After filing of the aforesaid charge-sheet, cognizance has been taken by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and a case has been registered as Criminal Case No. 817/2024. Challenging the aforesaid proceedings, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioners. 4. Mr. Y.C. Sharma, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners vehemently argued that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the petitioner No.01 is a government servant working as a Deputy Director Finance at Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Raipur and having no involvement in the aforesaid crime and also not even a single complaint against him in the whole service period. The learned trial Court also failed to appreciate that the petitioner No.02 is a retired government servant and having no involvement in the aforesaid crime and also not even a single complaint against him in the whole service period. He further argued that on the complaint of Chhattisgarh State Health Association dated 4 02.02.2019, the direction has been given by the authority for the enquiry with respect to the irregularity in the salary of the health worker posted at Mainpur. In compliance of which, an enquiry has been conducted by the Civil Surgeon of the District Hospital Gariyaband, in which the statements of the different employees have been recorded and on the basis of the statement given by the employees of the treasury and health department, the finding has been given that Guruvendra Sao (Assistant Grade II employee of the Treasury department of Gariyaband), Virendra Kumar Bhandari (Assistant Grade III-then Accounts Branch In charge) and Shri Kaleshwar Negi (Block Medical Officer), Vinod Kumar Dhruv (Ward Boy), Bhojram Diwan (Sweeper), Bharatlal Nande (Driver), Santosh Kumar Komra (Assistant Grade III) were the main accused and no where the name of the Petitioners have been mentioned in the enquiry report, which not shows the involvement of the Petitioners in the aforesaid embezzlement. 5. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that after the aforesaid enquiry, another enquiry has also been done by the Chief Medical Officer, Gariyaband and in a similar manner, no involvement of the present Petitioners has been found in the whole enquiry report. He further submitted that on the direction given by the Collector, Gariyaband, a Committee has been formed headed by Additional Collector, J.R. Chourasiya and in the enquiry report given by the Additional Collector, J.R.Chourasiya, no involvement of the present petitioners has been shown/found in the enquiry report. 5 He also argued that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that in furtherance of the aforesaid enquiry, again a fresh enquiry has been proceeded and the enquiry report has been submitted by the Committee headed by the Additional Collector, Mr. Avinash Bhoi, where the statement of the different employees of the health and treasury department clearly reveals that the present petitioners having no involvement in the aforesaid embezzlement. 6. On the other hand, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondent opposes this petition and submits that since the charges have been framed against the petitioner, and the perusal of the materials on record discloses commission of cognizable offence, no interference is warranted at this stage. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 8. In Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Apex Court has observed that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection in the rarest of rare cases. While examining an F.I.R./complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot inquire about the reliability, genuineness, or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R./complaint. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the Court to be cautious. The Apex Court has emphasized that though the Court has the power to quash the 6 F.I.R. in suitable cases, the Court, when it exercises power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations of F.I.R. disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider the case on merit. 9. It has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, that the proceedings relating to cognizable ofences cannot be interfered except on certain grounds enumerated by the Apex Court in the said judgment. It is evident that, none of the grounds mentioned by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said judgment are attracted in the present case. In State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani & others reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, if the information given clearly mentions the commission of cognizable ofence, there is no other option but to register an FIR forthwith. Other considerations are not relevant at the stage of registration of FIR. Also what is to be seen is merely whether the information given ex facie discloses commission of a cognizable offence. 10. From perusal of the contents of the FIR as well as in the charge- sheet, it transpires that there is specific allegation against all the accused persons including the present petitioners that they in collusion with each other, have prepared fake bills in the treasury through BTR, Bearer Cheque, forged handwritten seal and illegally withdrawn and embezzled a total government amount of 7 Rs.3,13,43,971 / (Three crore thirteen lakh forty-three thousand nine hundred seventy one rupees only) from the public account of the State. 11. On the basis of aforesaid allegation levelled against the petitioners, this Court cannot come to a conclusion that prima facie, no case is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners will have every opportunity before the learned Trial Court to rebut the allegations levelled against them. This Court cannot examine or appreciate the evidences that may be led before the learned Trial Court and stalling the trial would be wholly unjustiied. Further, in light of what has been said by the Supreme Court in Bhajanlal (supra) and Habib Abdullah Jeelani (supra), there appears to be no good ground for quashing of the charge-sheet. 12. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. 13. After passing of the order, learned Senior Advocate states that a direction may be issued for expediting the trial, but the said direction cannot be also given as the trial Court is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same expeditiously. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra