At the charge framing stage, courts must accept prosecution materials as true without conducting a mini-trial, determining only if prima facie evidence exists to proceed.

JUDGMENT :

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.

Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned Law Officer appearing on behalf of the Department of Vigilance.

2. This application has been preferred under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, the “Cr.P.C.”) for quashing the order dated 31.05.2024 as passed by the court of Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna in Special Case No. 2 of 2025, arising out of S.V.U. P.S. Case No. 1 of 2024, whereby and whereunder learned trial court has been pleased to take cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘P.C. Act’) and also to quash the order dated 12.12.2024 (through I.A. No. 01 of 2025), through which learned Vigilance Court framed charge under section 7 of the P.C. Act against the petitioner.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution as per First Information Report (in short, the ‘F.I.R.’) state that the informant namely, Santosh Kumar (opposite party no. 2) made his application dated 08.02.2024 to the Superintendent of Police, Special Vigilance Unit, Bihar, Patna, alleging therein that he is posted as Headmaster of N.P.S. Parsonikpur (Dusadh Toli) and the Block Education Officer, Patahi (petitioner), had been demanding a bribe of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) from him for allotment of funds relating to SSA Grant and Mid-day Meal. The petitioner was allegedly threatening the informant regarding the initiation of departmental proceedings if the informant failed to meet the said demand.

4. The aforesaid application was duly endorsed to the Sub-Inspector of Police for the purpose of causing an inquiry into the veracity of the allegations set forth therein. The Sub- Inspector of Police made his report dated 08.02.2024 to the Superintendent of Police to the effect that the allegations against the petitioner were correct. Accordingly, S.V.U. P.S. Case No. 01 of 2024 dated 12.02.2024 was registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 7 of the P.C. Act.

5. It is a trap case where the petitioner was caught red-handed with cash of Rs. 10,000/- by the raiding team of the Special Vigilance Unit (in short the ‘S.V.U.’), Patna, while he was receiving an alleged bribe amount from the informant.

6. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that upon bare perusal of the initial complaint, it would reveal that it was filed on 08.02.2024 to the Superintendent of Police, S.V.U. at Patna, where no time is mentioned. The said complaint was thereafter endorsed to the Sub-Inspector of Police for necessary verification, which was duly carried out on the same day, and the concerned officer submitted his verification report on 08.02.2024 itself. It is submitted that by any measure of human probability, the verification of the allegations and the submission of the report on the very same day is highly improbable, considering that the distance between Patna and Patahi exceeds 200 Kms. It is submitted that the present case was lodged out of ulterior and oblique motives to tarnish the image of the petitioner. In view of the facts as being superior authority, petitioner checked the malpractices of the informant qua mid-day meal.

7. It is submitted by Mr. Singh that after registering an F.I.R. on 12.02.2024, S.V.U. picked up two employees of BUDCO, Rajapur Pul, Patna, to be witnesses of the trap and thereafter the S.V.U. team reached Bela PACS Godown, Patahi, where a preliminary memorandum was prepared on 12.02.2024, whereafter the S.V.U. team proceeded to the office