JUDGMENT - G.R. MAJITHIA, J.---The petitioners, Padmakar Balkrishna Samant, Mrinal K. Gore, Kamal V. Desai and Jagannathrao S. Jadhav, have moved this Court for initiation of proceedings for the offence of perjury against Shri A.R. Antulay, in this Criminal Writ Petition.

2. The factual matrix is as under:

Writ Petition No. 1490 of 1981 and Writ Petition No. 1495 of 1981 were filed by Madhu R. Dandavate, and 5 others and by the present petitioners, respectively, against Shri A.R. Antulay and others. The gravamen of the complaint in these writ petitions was that Shri A.R. Antulay (hereinafter "the respondent") misused his position and power as the Chief Minister of Maharashtra, in collusion with Shri R.W. Adik, who was, at the relevant time, the Finance Minister and created fictitious trusts and appointed trustees who were his friends and relations. The respondent gave an impression that the trusts were created by the Government of Maharashtra and large amounts were secured from the Government as well as from several organisations. The six trusts so created were as under:---

1. Indira Gandhi Pratibha Pratishthan,

2. Konkan Unnati Mitra Mandal,

3. Mhasle Taluka Pratishthan,

4. Raigad Zilla Pratishthan,

5. Ambet Pratishthan,

6. Shrivardhan Matdar Sangh Pratishthan.

These trusts were registered as public charitable trusts under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 without following the procedure required under the provisions of the Act and the Rules and the trusts also secured exemption from payment of income-tax in respect of the amounts donated to them. On registration of the trusts, a large amount was donated by the Government of Maharashtra to Indira Gandhi Pratibha Pratishthan by giving an impression that the trust is created by the Government of Maharashtra. The respondent imposed his power and started receiving money for release of cement, increase of floor space index, allotment of Government lands, etc. towards donations to these trusts. These trusts were not the Government trusts but the private trusts set up by the respondent and were run by his family members. The allegations were denied by the respondent.

3. The present petitioners, in Writ Petition No. 1495 of 1981, prayed for the following declarations and directions:-

"(a) for the following declarations of this Hon'ble Court;

(i) that the 3rd respondent trust is without the authority of law, contrary to law and consequently bad in law;

(ii) that the grant of Rs. 2 crores to the 3rd respondent trust made by the 1st respondent and assented to by the State Legislature is mala fide, illegal, contrary to law, ultra vires Article 14, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever; and further that respondents Nos. 2 to 11 are bound in law to return and/or refund the same to the Consolidated Fund of the respondent No. 1;

(iii) that the registration of the 3rd respondent trust under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 by the 12th respondent is based on the misrepresentation of the 2nd respondent and is consequently illegal, contrary to law, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;

(iv) that the Income-tax exemption certificate granted by the 15th respondent on 25th November, 1980 under section 80-G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the 3rd respondent Trust is arbitrary, unreasonable ultra vires Article 14, contrary to law, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;

(b) for a writ of certiorari or a writ direction or order in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondents calling for the records of (a) the said donation of Rs. 2 Crores made by the 1st respondent to the 3rd respondent in two instalments of Rs. 10 lakhs by cheque No. 666072 drawn on the Reserve Bank of India on 29th October, 1980 and Rs. 1,90,00,000 made by cheque No. 925433 drawn on the Reserve Bank of India on 3rd August, 1981; (b) the said Registration Certificate given to the 3rd respondent Trust

Click Here to Read the rest of this document