Back
2022 Supreme(Del) 314
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J.
Dr Sanjeev Kumar Rasania - Appellant
Versus
Cbi & Ors. - Respondents
Crl.M.C. No. 878/2021 & Crl.M.A. 4402/2021 (Stay)
Decided On : 03-01-2022
Mr. Somiran Sharma and Mr. Tabarak Hussain, Advocates, for the Appellant, Mr. Prasanta Verma, SPP for CBI. Mr. Mukul Gupta, Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Gupta, Mr. Parinay Gupta and Mr. Sumit Kumar Mishra, Advocate, for the Respondent.
The inherent power of the High Court cannot be invoked to override the bar of review under Section 362 Cr.P.C. and the importance of evidence in criminal proceedings.
Headnote:
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - IPC, P.C. Act - 120B, 420, 468, 471, 13(2), 13(1)(D) - The court discussed the relevance of videography of inspection, the existence of mala fide intention, and the role of the investigating agency in the criminal proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings against the Petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The allegations revolved around a criminal conspiracy between officials from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the Chairman of a medical college for the renewal of permission for admission of students, despite violations of regulations. The investigation revealed discrepancies in inspection reports and the alleged cover-up of deficiencies.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the existence of videography of inspection was crucial to the case and remanded the matter back to the Trial Court. However, subsequent revelations regarding the non-existence of the videography raised questions about the investigation and the possibility of foul play.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court could render an order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. that would override the bar instituted under Section 362 Cr.P.C. The court also addressed the discrepancies in statements regarding the existence of the videography and the custody of the same.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the inherent power of the High Court cannot be invoked to override the bar of review under Section 362 Cr.P.C. The court also emphasized the importance of evidence and the need for a high-level probe into the existence of the videography.
Final Decision: The court directed the constitution of a High-Level Committee by the CBI to conduct a probe into the existence of the videography of the inspection and ordered the report to be placed on record before the next date of hearing.
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. - This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings against the Petitioner herein in Case No. CBI/0000048/2019 pending before Ld. Special Judge (P.C. Act), CBI, Rouse Avenue, arising out of FIR No. 006/2010/A0014/ACB/Lucknow under Section 120B read with Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter, "IPC") and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter, "the P.C. Act").
2. The facts, in brief, leading up to this petition as follows:
a) It is stated that information was received that some unknown officials from Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (hereinafter, "MoHFW"), Government of India, had enteredinto a criminal conspiracy with Keshav Kumar Aggarwal, Chairman, Rohilkhand Medical College, Bareilly (hereinafter, "the College), and others, for the renewal of permission for admission of 100 MBBS students, despite gross violations of Medical Council of India (hereinafter, "MCI") regulations, as per which renewal of permission is granted by the Union Government until facilities at the medical college and the hospital are completed in accordance with MCI norms.
b) It is stated that MoHFW vide letter dated 14.07.2006 granted permission for the admission of the 1st batch of 100 MBBS students to the College, and this permission was renewed on 17.08.2007 for admission of the 2nd batch of 100 students. However, inspections conducted by MCI on 20.05.2008 revealed that the prescribed norms were not being met, and the Executive Committee (hereinafter, "EC") of MCI recommended for the matter to be referred to the police authorities for registration of FIRs. Thereafter, another inspection was conducted on 19.08.2008, however, as the deficiencies persisted, the EC on 25.08.2008 recommended the Union Government to not renew permission for admission of 3rd batch of 100 students. The MoHFW agreed with the recommendations and communicated to the College vide letter dated 12.09.2008 that it would not renew permission.
c) It is stated that aggrieved by the decision, the College approached the Supreme Court vide W.P.(C). 426/2008, wherein after submissions of the then Ld. Additional Solicitor General, the Supreme Court observed vide Order dated 26.09.2008 that the facilities were inadequate even for the purpose of a reduced intake of students, and therefore, permission could not be given. However, on 26.09.2008, the MoHFW granted renewal for admission of a 3rd batch of 100 students for 2008-2009, stating that an inspection had been conducted on 25.09.2008 by a Central Team constituted by MoHFW who had noted that adequate facilities were available at the College. This Central Team, comprising Dr. Vindu Amitabh and Dr. S.K. Rasania (Petitioner herein) had conducted an investigation and in their report, which was favourable to the College, noted that position of the faculty had been accepted on the basis of undertaking given by the college authorities.
d) It is stated that the deputation of the Central Team by MoHFW was done with a mala fide intention in order to obtain a favourable inspection report, and that a subsequent inspection conducted by MCI on 01.10.2008, i.e. after a lapse of five days, found that the inadequate facilities were still persisting. Accordingly, MCI issued a letter dated 06.10.2008 to the Union Government to recall the letter of permission dated 26.09.2008. It is stated that no action has been taken by the Union Government on the same.
e) On the grounds that the officers of MoHFW connived with the Chairman of the College and others in a bid to grant permission for admission at the College, an FIR was registered and the investigation was entrusted to the CBI. Chargesheet was thereafter filed by CBI, with Dr. Keshav Kumar Agrawal, Chairman, Rohilkhand Educational Trust as Accused No.1, Dr. K.V.S. Rao, Dy. Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India as Accused No.2, Dr. Ambumani Ramadoss, t
