1. This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 8-7-2006 passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Kashmir, in File No. 121/B of 2006 titled State Vs. Muzaffar Ahmad Bhat and others, discharging the accused-respondents of the charges leveled against them. Before proceeding further, it is profitable to notice the brief facts of the case.

2. Respondent No. 1-accused in response to the notification No. C of 1989 dated 22-6-1989 applied for the post of Lecturer in the discipline of Music for Higher Education Department. M.A. Music or equivalent grade was the requisite qualification for the said post and minimum age for applying for the post was prescribed as 18 years. Respondent No. 1-accused possessed diploma in Sangeet Basker from Pracheen Kala Kendra, Chandigarh. The case of the prosecution is that possessing of diploma in Sangeet Baskar from Pracheen Kala Kendra, Chandigarh and relied by accused No. 1 was not equivalent to M.S. Music and he had also not attained the age of 18 years as on 1-1-1989, as required in terms of notification referred to hereinabove. The allegation against other accused-respondents 2 to 6 who were members of the Eligibility Committee of the Public Service Commission, is that they hatched a conspiracy and declared accused No. 1 as eligible despite of the fact that he was not having minimum age at the relevant point of time and was not possessing requisite qualification.

3. The trial court after hearing learned counsel for the parties discharged the accused and dismissed the challan.

4. The Investigating Officer after collecting material and investigating the case, submitted charge sheet in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the accused-respondents with the allegations that the accused No. 1 was not 18 years of age on 1-1-1989 and he was not having requisite qualification. The Investigating Officer has also obtained notification No. 10-PSC of 1989 dated 22-6-1989, a copy whereof is on the trial court file. The said notification provides that the candidate applying for the post of Lecturer must possess Masters Degree in the relevant subject ...... or its equivalent grade and good academic record. It is profitable to reproduce relevant portion of the said notification hereunder:

"QUALIFICATION:

"Masters degree in the relevant subject with at least 55% marks or its equivalent grade and good academic record."

Besides other conditions, it also lays down the following conditions:

i. x x x x x x x x x

ii. from persons not possessing the minimum basic qualifications as prescribed above on the last date for receipt of applications;

iii. from persons not conforming to the age limit prescribed above on the last date for receipt of application; .............................................................. "

5. As per the terms and conditions contained in the notification, the accused-respondent No. 1must be 18 years of age and must possess Masters Degree or its equivalent grade as on 4-8-1989. The question which arises for determination is whether as per material collected by the Investigating Officer and documents collected under section 173 Cr.P.C. read with charge sheet, the accused No. 1 was 18 years of age on the said date and was possessing requisite qualification? In order to find answer to these questions, it is necessary to peruse the record.

6. As per record, the Investigating Officer has seized date of birth certificate of the accused No. 1 issued by the J&K State Board of School Education, in which the date of birth of the accused - respondent No. 1 is shown as 14-2-1971. Thus he was more than 18 years of age on the cut of date i.e. 4-8-1989. The first allegation against the accused thus fails.

7. Now coming to the second allegation that there the accused - respondent No. 1 was having diploma in Sangeet Bhasker, which is not the equivalent grade, is also not correct. The Investigating Officer has seized qualification certificates of the accused No. 1which disc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document