IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.
Dr. Saleem Ur Rehman - Petitioner
Vs.
State of J&K and Others - Respondents
OWP No. 1961 of 2015
Decided On : 07-05-2018
(B) Jammu and Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 – Section 3 – Jammu and Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure, 1989 – Section 155 – Prosecution of public servant – Section 3 of Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act, 2006 is a mandatory provision and non – adherence renders investigation void – Investigation launched by respondents in absence of a valid sanction by Magistrate as provided under Section 155 J&K Cr.P.C. is illegal – Rule 3.16 of Vigilance Manual, 2008 dealing with Preliminary Enquiry (PE) being in direct conflict with Constitution Bench Judgment of Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari (AIR 2014 SC 187) declared ultra vires. (Paras 28, 33, 34, 44 and 45)
Result – Petition allowed.
1. The petitioner has come up to this Court invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction to undo the injustice sought to be meted out to him. The subject matter of challenge in the instant petition is the FIR No.32/2012 registered at Police Station, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir (VOK), on the 16th day of November, 2012, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 5(1) (2), 5(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt., 2006 and 120-B of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).
2. Sheared of unnecessary details, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the writ petitioner, while serving as Director Health Services, Kashmir, Vigilance Organization, Kashmir, registered a case, FIR No. 32/2012, against the petitioner and other accused officers alleging therein that during the year 2010-11, the substandard drug kits were procured from Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) in deviation of the Preference Purchase Policy (PPP), Government of India, thereby causing undue advantage to the suppliers and corresponding loss to the State exchequer.
3. Heard, the learned counsel for the parties, perused the material on record and considered the matter.
4. The facts leading to the filing of the instant petition, briefly and as stated by the petitioner in this petition, are that under the framework of the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM), the drug kits were required to be purchased from the Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) and their subsidiaries, as per the Purchase Preference Policy (PPP) of the Government of India and as directed by the Mission Director, NRHM, Jammu & Kashmir, vide letter dated 28th of December, 2010. Before approaching the Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs), the petitioner took up the matter with the approved State Purchase Committees vide communication dated 27th of January, 2011, with regard to the approval of the rate contract. In pursuance to the said communication, the Purchase Committee No.1 assented to effect the purchase in accordance with the rules, however, the Purchase Committee No.2 did not respond, which was intimated to the Mission Director, NRHM, vide letter dated 7th of February, 2011. The Mission Director, vide communication dated 12th of March, 2011, directed immediate procurement of the drug kits. Subsequently, a Committee of four members was constituted on the 12th of March, 2011, and tender notices were published in national Dailies, inviting bids by or before the 22nd of March, 2011. The department, as stated, received four tenders quoting equal rates for the items and, as per the Resolution of the Board of Members, it was unanimously recommended to purchase the drug kits from all the four CPSEs on equal share basis and the payment to the respective CPSEs was made through e-banking/ account payee cheques. On 16th of November, 2012, FIR No. 32/2012 came to be registered at Police Station, Vigilance Organization Kashmir (VOK), for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 5(1) (2), 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt., 2006 and Section 120(B) of the Ranbir Penal Code (R.P.C.), with regard to the transaction of purchase of drug kits under the National Rural Health Mission Scheme, by the Directorate of Health Services, Kashmir, for the year 2010-2011. The FIR is registered against the petitioner, the then Director Health Services, Members of the tender Opening Committee, officers/ official of NRHM, Members of the Verifying Committee, and Suppliers. The petitioner, in the capacity of the then Director, Health Services, Kashmir, has been implicated in the case and served with the questionnaire dated 6th of April, 2015, which stands replied by the petitioner vide explanation dated 29th of April, 2015.
5. The FIR, impugned in this petition, is registered with regard to the transaction of purchase of drug kits under National Rural Health Mission Scheme, by the Directorate of Health Services, Kashmir, for the year 2011-2011, against the petitioner, the the
SupremeToday
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.