2013 Supreme(Jhk) 1147
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi
R.R. PRASAD, J.
Binod Kumar Singh – Petitioner
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation through its S.P, (A.C.B), Ranchi - Opposite Party
Cr.M.P.No.141 of 2013
Decided on: 18.10.2013
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S.N. Prasad
For the C.B.I.: Mr. M. Khan
Headnote:Jharkhand Regional Development Authority Act, 2001-Sections 52, 32 and 37 r/w Clause C of Appendix-C of Ranchi Planning Standards and Building Bye-laws, 2002---If there happens to be any contravention of provisions of Act, Rules or Bye-laws, in the matter of construction of buildings, technical person can be held responsible-plea that an architect cannot be held responsible for building plan not in conformity with the provisions of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws not acceptable---Impugned order taking cognizance affirmed.
One writ application, vide W.P (PIL) No.1531 of 2011 was filed before this Court for issuance of mandamus directing the respondent-State including Vice-Chairman, Ranchi Regional Development Authority, Ranchi, and Chief Executive Officer, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi to remove unauthorized structure being used as go-down and shop constructed in the parking area of ‘Chandralok Apartment’. During hearing of the case, it was brought to the notice of the court that such permission has been granted by the officials of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority illegally in connivance with the builders and others not for one Apartment but in many of the Apartments. At the same time, it was also brought to the notice of the Court that number of multi storied buildings have been constructed by deviating from their sanctioned maps. Such deviation and alteration made with the connivance of the officials of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority was taken by the Court not only a civil wrongs but also criminal offence as such a space dedicated to common use being used for other purposes amounts to encroachment to the rights of the others. Therefore, the Court did find it proper and appropriate to get the matter be investigated upon by the C.B.I. Accordingly, a formal letter was issued to the C.B.I to institute a case and to proceed with it against the persons committed wrong in connivance with the officials of Ranchi Regional Development Authority.
2. Accordingly, an FIR was lodged by the C.B.I against unknown persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468, 471 and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(i)(d)of the Prevention of Corrupti9on Act and also under Section 52 of the Jharkhand Regional Development Authority Act, 2001 as well as under Section 82 of the Registration Act.
3. Having lodged the case, the C.B.I took up the investigation. During investigation, the matter relating to sanction of the building plans of M/s. Jagannath Lifecare (P) Limited, Ranchi and M/s. Rani children Hospital and Research (P) Limited were also examined. In that course, it was found that one Dr. Rajesh Kumar, Director of M/s. Rani Children Hospital & Research Center (P) Limited and Dr.Sudhir Kumar, Director of M/s. Jagannath Lifecare (P) Limited had purchased the lands bearing plot no.564, appertaining to Khata No.27 situated under Mouza Hatma from Sri Basant Toppo after getting permission in terms of the provision of Section 49 of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act.
4. After purchasing the land, M/s. Jagannath Lifecare (P) Limited submitted building construction plan in the year 2008, upon which a case bearing B.C No.269 of 2008 was initiated.
5. On submission of such plan, the applicant according to the case of the C.B.I became apprehensive that map may not be sanctioned as the land over which map was sought to be sanctioned was ‘Public Open Space’. Therefore, the plan was again submitted by M/s. Jagannath Lifecare (P) Limited through M/s. Grids Consultants to which this petitioner was one of the partners by showing the plot as plot no.568 upon which a case bearing B.C No.531 of 2008 was initiated.
6. In the said case, map was sanctioned by the Ranchi Regional Development Authority by showing plot no.564 as 568 as R.S. plot no.564 situated in Mouza Hatma was ‘Public Open Space.’ The said map had been prepared under the supervision of this petitioner. In the said map, two roads were shown existing in front of the plot. One was shown to the north of the plot but in fact, no such road was existing. The other road was shown to be of width of 9 meter but, in fact, the land was recorded as ‘Kaisare Hind’ and width of that road was never of 9 meters.
7. According to the case of the prosecution, this was done by M/s. Grids Consultants to which this petitioner is one of the partners to get the map of the building (G+4) sanctioned in collusion with the officials of the Ranchi Regional Development Authority.
8. On such allegation, charge sheet