IMPORTANT POINT
When an official is caught red-handed and is being proceeded under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, there is no scope for leniency, and if the facts are clear and do not warrant a preliminary inquiry, recourse to Rule 22(2) of the Rules of 1996 can be taken to proceed against the erring official.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.01.2024 (Annex.5), whereby, the petitioner has been suspended from the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Jadana, Panchayat Samiti Rashmi, District Chittorgarh.

3. Briefly noted the facts in the present writ petition are that the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jadana, Panchayat Samiti Rashmi, District Chittorgarh in the year 2020. The petitioner, while working as Sarpanch, was arrested in pursuance of an FIR No.301/2023 dated 03.12.2023 registered by Anti Corruption Bureau, Chittorgarh under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The allegation against the petitioner was that he was caught red handed while accepting an amount of Rs.2,40,000/-as bribe. In pursuance of the FIR registered against the petitioner, he was put in judicial custody and was ultimately bailed out by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.01.2024. The petitioner was issued a notice dated 24.01.2024 seeking an explanation as to why the proceedings under Rule 22 (2) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’) be not initiated against him and on the same date the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet (Annex.4). As a consequence, the petitioner was suspended by the respondents vide order dated 24.01.2024. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed against the order of suspension dated 24.01.2024.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submits that the respondents have proceeded in a hasty manner as the petitioner was issued a notice on 24.01.2024 and on the same day the charge-sheet was filed and the order of suspension was also issued on 24.01.2024 itself. Learned counsel submits that recourse to sub-Rule (1) of Rule 22 of the Rules of 1996 had not been taken and therefore, the order of suspension issued is arbitrary, illegal and unreasonable. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the order of suspension dated 24.01.2024 may be quashed and set-aside.

5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case including the impugned order dated 24.01.2024.

6. The admitted facts in the present case are that the petitioner, while discharging the functions & duties of a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Jadana, Panchayat Samiti Rashmi, District Chittorgarh, was caught red handed while accepting a bribe of Rs.2,40,000/-. In pursuance of the registration of FIR No.301/2023, the petitioner was arrested and had suffered incarceration till he was bailed out by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 16.01.2024.

7. Sub-Rule 1 & 2 of Rule 22 of the Rules of 1996 reads as under:

“(1) Before taking any action under Sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 38, where on its own motion or upon any complaint the State Government may ask the Chief Executive Officer or any other officer to get a preliminary enquiry done and to send his report to the State Government within one month.

(2) If, upon consideration of the report received as aforesaid or otherwise, the State Government is of the opinion that action under Sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 38 is necessary, the State Government shall frame definite charges and shall communicate them in writing to the Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson or Member of the Panchayati Raj Institution together with such details as may be deemed necessary. He shall be required to submit written statement within one month admitting or denying the allegations, giving his defence if any and whether he desires to be heard in person.”

8. The basic intention of the rule framers is that if any complaint or any allegation is brought to the notice of the State Government then before proceeding against concerned official under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, a fact finding preliminary enquiry should be done. The intention of the law is to find out the veracity