2018 Supreme(Raj) 2291

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Lalit Soni S/o Radha Krishna Verma - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1000 of 2013, 1001 of 2013
Decided On : 14-12-2018

The term 'commissioning' was not defined in the PPA, and thus, the said term was a subjective word, which was utilized by the authorities concerned, while issuing the aforesaid certificate certifying commissioning of the Project on 09.01.2012, which was of course not accepted by the Nodal Agency i.e. NTPC-NVVN. Thereafter, after assessment thereof, the same was implemented finally, while deriving the conclusion to the effect of ascertainment of the date of commissioning of the Power Plant as 28.01.2012. Such derivement of the final assessment was done, after taking into account the definitions issued and clarified by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, and thus, the said date of commissioning of the Project could be ascertained only on 05.07.2012. The present FIR has been lodged on 26.12.2012, which was much subsequent to the action completed by all the parties, including invocation of the penalty Clause 4.6.1 of the PPA, as indicated hereinabove.

Headnote:

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT - COMMISSIONING CERTIFICATE - QUASHING OF FIR - [SECTION 13(1)(D), 13(2)] - The petitioners, State Officers, were not required to give a commissioning certificate, but were required to give certain information of commissioning of certain component in the Plant. The term 'commissioning' was not defined in the PPA, and thus, the said term was a subjective word, which was utilized by the authorities concerned, while issuing the aforesaid certificate certifying commissioning of the Project on 09.01.2012, which was of course not accepted by the Nodal Agency i.e. NTPC-NVVN. Thereafter, after assessment thereof, the same was implemented finally, while deriving the conclusion to the effect of ascertainment of the date of commissioning of the Power Plant as 28.01.2012. Such derivement of the final assessment was done, after taking into account the definitions issued and clarified by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, and thus, the said date of commissioning of the Project could be ascertained only on 05.07.2012. The present FIR has been lodged on 26.12.2012, which was much subsequent to the action completed by all the parties, including invocation of the penalty Clause 4.6.1 of the PPA, as indicated hereinabove. The stand of the NTPC has further clarified the whole situation, as the NTPC-NVVN, which was directly the Nodal Agency under the National Solar Mission of the Government of India, and the contractual partner in the matter, has in fact categorically stated that the declaration of commissioning of Solar Power Project on different parameters was a mere irregularity and not an illegality, and the said irregularity has occurred in absence of clear guidelines and definition of the term 'commissioning'. Thus, the clinching effect of the stand so taken by the NTPC in the present case is that the impugned FIR itself, which allegedly was registered so as to constitute a criminal offence, goes away. Held - The present misc. petitions are allowed and the impugned FIR No.532 dated 26.12.2012 pending investigation at Police Station CPS ACB, Jaipur for the offences under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is hereby quashed.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, State Officers, were not required to give a commissioning certificate, but were required to give certain information of commissioning of certain component in the Plant. The term 'commissioning' was not defined in the PPA, and thus, the said term was a subjective word, which was utilized by the authorities concerned, while issuing the aforesaid certificate certifying commissioning of the Project on 09.01.2012, which was of course not accepted by the Nodal Agency i.e. NTPC-NVVN. Thereafter, after assessment thereof, the same was implemented finally, while deriving the conclusion to the effect of ascertainment of the date of commissioning of the Power Plant as 28.01.2012. Such derivement of the final assessment was done, after taking into account the definitions issued and clarified by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, and thus, the said date of commissioning of the Project could be ascertained only on 05.07.2012. The present FIR has been lodged on 26.12.2012, which was much subsequent to the action completed by all the parties, including invocation of the penalty Clause 4.6.1 of the PPA, as indicated hereinabove. The stand of the NTPC has further clarified the whole situation, as the NTPC-NVVN, which was directly the Nodal Agency under the National Solar Mission of the Government of India, and the contractual partner in the matter, has in fact categorically stated that the declaration of commissioning of Solar Power Project on different parameters was a mere irregularity and not an illegality, and the said irregularity has occurred in absence of clear guidelines and definition of the term 'commissioning'. Thus, the clinching effect of the stand so taken by the NTPC in the present case is that the impugned FIR itself, which allegedly was registered so as to constitute a criminal offence, goes away.

Finding of the Court:

The present misc. petitions are allowed and the impugned FIR No.532 dated 26.12.2012 pending investigation at Police Station CPS ACB, Jaipur for the offences under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is hereby quashed.

Issues: None

Ratio Decidendi: The stand of the NTPC has further clarified the whole situation, as the NTPC-NVVN, which was directly the Nodal Agency under the National Solar Mission of the Government of India, and the contractual partner in the matter, has in fact categorically stated that the declaration of commissioning of Solar Power Project on different parameters was a mere irregularity and not an illegality, and the said irregularity has occurred in absence of clear guidelines and definition of the term 'commissioning'. Thus, the clinching effect of the stand so taken by the NTPC in the present case is that the impugned FIR itself, which allegedly was registered so as to constitute a criminal offence, goes away.

Final Decision: The present misc. petitions are allowed and the impugned FIR No.532 dated 26.12.2012 pending investigation at Police Station CPS ACB, Jaipur for the offences under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is hereby quashed.