West Bengal State Agricultural Marketing Board v. The State of West Bengal

Judgment

#1. This instant application is for condonation of delay of 1463 days in preferring the Revisional application filed by the petitioner under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, ‘CrPC’) challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the impugned Order dated 09.04.2014 passed by the Learned Judge, 4th Special Court, Calcutta in Case No. 01 of 2013 arising out of Hare Street P.S. Case No. 172 dated 13.03.2013 under Sections 120B/420/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pending before the Learned 4th Special Court, Bankshall Court, Calcutta for adjudication.

#2. By the said impugned order, the Learned Trial Court allowed the opposite party no. 2, another Government establishment, namely, West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited, to withdraw the amount from the freezed account of the petitioner.

#3. The brief facts of the case as per the petitioner are that the petitioner is a body corporate. The State Government, in exercise of 3 its power conferred under the provisions of Section 36 of the West Bengal Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1972, as amended thereto, constituted and established the petitioner board by way of notification published in the Official Gazette. In view of The West Bengal Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) (Amendment) Act, 2014, the name of the West Bengal State Marketing Board has been renamed as West Bengal State Agricultural Marketing Board, the petitioner herein.

#4. The petitioner herein receives market fees from various Market Committees and such amounts collected are deposited in the West Bengal State Marketing Board Fund. The Board also invests the money in short term deposit scheme to earn interest on the idle amount.

#5. Sometime in the month of November 2013, the debit transaction in respect of the account of the petitioner with the Allahabad Bank, Ultadanga Branch was frozen. Upon enquiry, it was informed to the petitioner that pursuant to the notice under Section 102 of the CrPC, issued by the Officer-in-Charge, Bank Fraud Section Detective Department, Lal Bazar in connection with Hare Street P.S. Case No. 172 dated 13.03.2013 under Sections 120B/420/467 4 /468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, bank account was frozen.

#6. The matter was placed before the higher authorities of the petitioner for its decision. However, in the month of June 12, 2014 it appears that a sum of Rs. 15,66,06,608/- has been withdrawn from the bank account of the petitioner and upon enquiry, it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that by the impugned order dated

09.04.2014 passed by the Learned 4th Special Court, Calcutta, the opposite party no. 2, another Government establishment, namely, West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited was permitted to withdraw the said amount from the account of the petitioner though, entire money belongs to the petitioner.

Ms. Sanyal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the impugned order passed by the Learned Special Court, the amount of the petitioner was withdrawn by the opposite party no. 2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the petitioner filed this Revisional application praying for setting aside the impugned order with a further direction upon the opposite party no. 2 to return or to 5 deposit the said amount of Rs. 15,66,06,608/- to an interest-bearing account and/or restrained them from utilisation said amount until disposal of the Revisional application.

#8. Learned counsel further submitted that the delay of 1463 days in filing of application was unintentional. Delay occurred due to internal movement of files in different departments to take decision on the issue of filing appropriate application after consultation and deliberation with the higher officials, finally, obtaining opinion and advice from the legal department. The file was sent to the Secretary through proper channel through Joint Secretary to the Secretary at Nabanna prior to filing of the application, the authority was to be given sanction to file the application against the impugned order of the Learned Special Court. It took time for consultation, preparation of the draft application, vetting for legal compliance and filing of the Revisional application caused a delay of 1463 days, was absolutely unintentional, not deliberate and/or latches on the part of the petitioner.

#9. In addition, it was further submitted that the record was misplaced during the aforesaid process of filing. Therefore, such delay was beyond the control of the officials as such it may be condoned to 6 do substantial justice as both the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 are Government organisations and huge amount of money is involved.

#10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has placed reliance of the following judgments in order to support her contention that this Court can condone such delay, when there are two government establishments are involved and to do substantial justice. Those judgments are as under: - i. Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) Through Legal Rep. & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr.1 Particularly in Paragraph Nos. 35, 41 and 42 thereof; ii. State of Manipur & Ors. Vs. Koting Lamkang2 particularly in Paragraph Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 thereof; iii. State of Haryana Vs. Chandra Mani & Ors.3 particularly in Paragraph Nos. 11 and 12 thereof; iv. Special Tehsildar, Land Acquisition, Kerala Vs. K.V. Ayisumma4 particularly in Paragraph No. 2 thereof;