Point of Law: High Court would persuade to exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and to quash criminal proceedings to avoid or to prevent abuse of process of court and secure ends of justice.

ORDER :

The petitioner was a Range Officer at Social Forestry Range, Thiruvananthapuram. She seeks to quash the FIR No.V.C.1/2021 of VACB, Southern Range, Thiruvananthapuram, against her. She faces allegations under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. Facts

2.1. Respondent No.3 holds a contract license under the Kerala Forest Department. He was engaged in the contract work of the Forest Department at Attingal in Thiruvananthapuram Range. In 2020, respondent No.3 was awarded the contract for the maintenance of compensatory afforestation at Kerala University Campus, Karyavattam, in lieu of tree felling for the Vizhinjam International Seaport Project. The petitioner, being the Range Officer of the Social Forestry Division, was responsible for passing the bills submitted for the work undertaken by respondent No.3.

2.2. Respondent No.3 filed a complaint before the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau on 15.8.2021, alleging the following:

Respondent No.3 completed the work of compensatory afforestation at the Kerala University Campus at Karyavattam. He was entitled to Rs.4,00,000/-towards the work. He completed the job in June 2020. Thereafter, he approached the petitioner for passing the bill. The petitioner demanded Rs.70,000/-as a bribe for clearing the bill. The petitioner instructed respondent No.3 to handover the money to Sri.K.K.Salim, a forester attached to her office. On 11.8.2021, respondent No.3 reached the petitioner’s office at PTP Nagar and requested her to clear the bills before Onam. However, the petitioner and Sri.Salim demanded Rs.70,000/-for clearing the bill. He was also instructed to pay a part of the amount to Sri.Ragesh, another officer of the department.

2.3. Based on the complaint preferred by respondent No.3, the above-referred FIR was registered arraying the petitioner as accused No.1 and Sri.Ragesh and Sri.Salim as accused Nos.2 and 3, respectively. On 16.8.2021, the Vigilance Officials, accompanied by respondent No.3, arrived at the Range Forest Office, Thiruvananthapuram at PTP Nagar at 15 hrs. The petitioner was not there. Respondent No.3 contacted the petitioner over the phone. She instructed respondent No.3 to contact Sri.K.K.Salim. Sri.Biju handed over the ‘trap money’ of Rs.70,000/-to Sri.K.K.Salim. Sri.Salim was arrested along with the ‘trap money’. The Vigilance Officials conducted a phenolphthalein test, which turned positive.

3. SUBMISSIONS

The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Cibi Thomas submitted that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations levelled against her. The petitioner, being the Range Forest Officer, entrusted with the responsibility of supervising the work undertaken by respondent No.3, conducted frequent visits to the plot where the work was done. She found that respondent No.3 had yet to complete the work as agreed. Respondent No.3 entered into agreement No.1/2021 dated 30.4.2021 with the Kerala Forest Department for the completion of maintenance of compensatory afforestation in lieu of tree felling for Vizhinjam International Seaport Project at the Kerala University Campus, Karyavattam. Respondent No.3, based on the agreement, started work on 25.5.2021 after getting a certificate from the petitioner on 24.5.2021. The work done by respondent No.3 was found to be unsatisfactory. The petitioner and other officials entrusted with the responsibility of supervising the work gave repeated instructions. He came with a measurement book relating to 7 hectares. The work was originally for ten hectares. Therefore, the petitioner issued a communication dated 22.6.2021 to respondent No.3 directing him to complete the work in terms of the agreement. The petitioner had sent a copy of the communication to the Deputy Forest Conservator, Social Forestry, Thiruvananthapuram (Annexure IV). The Deputy Conservator of Forest sent a communication dated 25.6.2021 to respondent No.3 pointing out the defects in the work carried out by him (Annexure V). On receipt of Annexures IV