SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Cal) 128

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
Udayan Majumder – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal and Ors. – Respondents
C.R.R. 4597 of 2022
Decided On : 27-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Indranil Nandi Mr. Sayak Konar
For the Respondent: Mr. Madhusudan Sur, APP Mr. Manoranjan Mahata

The court must assess whether sufficient grounds exist for proceeding against the accused, focusing on prima facie evidence rather than merely accepting prosecution claims.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d) - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 227 - Discharge of accused - Allegations of malpractice in recruitment process - The petitioner contended that he was not the controller of the examination and no evidence of entrustment of property was established against him - The trial court found prima facie material to proceed with the trial, rejecting the discharge application. (Paras 11, 12, 24)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Discharge of Accused - The court must determine if there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused, not merely act as a post office for the prosecution. (Paras 15, 18)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought discharge from criminal proceedings initiated based on allegations of malpractice in a recruitment process for Lower Division Clerks in the Agriculture Department, which was previously upheld by the Administrative Tribunal and the Supreme Court. (Paras 1-6)

Findings of Court:
The trial court found sufficient prima facie evidence to proceed with the trial against the petitioner, rejecting the discharge application. (Paras 24)

Issues: The main issues included whether the petitioner was the controller of the examination and if there was sufficient evidence of malpractice to proceed with the trial. (Paras 10, 24)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the trial judge must assess whether there are grounds for presuming the accused committed an offence, and not merely rely on the prosecution's assertions. (Paras 15, 18)

Result: C.R.R 4597 of 2022 thus stands dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee , J.

1. The impugned criminal proceeding, in respect of which petitioner has sought for his discharge arises out of a complaint dated 26th May, 2014 made by the then secretary, department of agriculture, Government of West Bengal on the basis of a report dated 25.04.2014, filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police CID, West Bengal. Petitioner submits that the fact leading to the instant criminal proceeding emanates from a recruitment process initiated by the Director, Agriculture Department, on 12th October, 2007 for recruitment of 331 Lower Division Clerk in the regional offices of the said Directorate. Accordingly an examination was held on 9th December, 2007as per schedule and the result of said examination in the form of merit list of candidates was also published in the official website of the government and also in the notice board of the District Agriculture office.

2. However, by a notification dated 18th January, 2008, the State Government cancelled the said examination on the ground that it was learnt that some candidates could not appear in the said examination for no fault of their own. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that some of the successful candidates whose name appeared in the merit list of candidates, (apart from two candidates whose contention were that they could not appear in the said examination for non-receipt of the admit card), instituted application before the Administrative Tribunal.

3. The Tribunal by the judgment and order dated 22nd July, 2009 was pleased to set aside the order dated 18th January, 2008 passed by State Government in cancelling the said examination and thereby directed the government to give appointment of the candidates from the merit list following the relevant roaster.

4. Three separate Writ Petitions were instituted by two candidates who contended that they could not appear in the said examination for not receiving the admit card and thereby assailed the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal. A Division Bench of this High Court by an order dated 18th September, 2012 was pleased to dismiss all the three Writ Petitions and thereby affirmed the judgment and order dated 22.07.2009 passed by the Administrative Tribunal.

5. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 18th September, 2012 the State Government assailed the said judgment before the Supreme Court by filing a special leave petition, which stood dismissed by the Apex Court on 22nd February, 2013. Thereafter, the State Government instituted a review application before the Division Bench of this High Court, which also stood dismissed. The State Government instituted another Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of this court, in disposing the Review Application, which stood dismissed as withdrawn.

6. In the meantime the successful applicants initiated a contempt proceeding against the then secretary, Department of Agriculture before the Division Bench, where contempt rule was issued against the defacto complaint by the Division Bench. Meanwhile the accused no.1 retired from the government service on superannuation on 31st January, 2014. Subsequent to the retirement of the accused no.1, the instant FIR was filed.

7. Mr. Nandi learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the prosecution has founded their case on assumption that accused no.1/petitioner herein had acted as the Chief Controller/Controller of the said examination. It has been stated that the successor in office of the accused no.1 could not recall if he had received all the files/CDs etc. relating to the aforesaid recruitment from accused no.1. Later on some of the files were seized but the major portion of the files are missing. In fact it was learnt by the IO (investigating officer) during investigation that Dr. Dhabaleswar Konar, Director of the Directorate of Agriculture had initiated the recruitment proces

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top