Back
2012 Supreme(All) 1697
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Amar Saran, Anurag Kumar, JJ.
Akhouri Rajendra Prasad Singh -Appellant
Versus
State of U.P.and Others -Respondent
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 8126 of 2012
Decided On : 10-07-2012
Counsel for the Petitioner: Dr. C.P. Upadhyay.
Counsel for the Respondents: A.G.A.
The investigation by the investigating agency is determinative of the complicity of an alleged offender, and timely conclusion of investigations is crucial in addressing fraudulent activities.
Headnote:
Forgery - Criminal Conspiracy - Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 406, 409 - The court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner, who was alleged to be complicit in a scam involving fraudulent disbursement of scholarship funds to non-existent individuals and institutions. The court directed the investigating agency to conclude the investigation within two months and registered the case as a criminal Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to address the illegal payments to non-existent schools. The court also sought responses from the Director General of Police (DGP) and the Principal Secretaries of Primary and Secondary Education regarding similar cases and measures to eliminate the menace of non-existent paper schools.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a scam where scholarship funds were fraudulently disbursed to non-existent individuals and institutions. The petitioner, a clerk in the District Social Welfare office, was alleged to have been complicit in the offense.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the writ petition and directed the investigating agency to conclude the investigation within two months. It also registered the case as a criminal PIL and sought responses from relevant authorities regarding similar cases and measures to eliminate the menace of non-existent paper schools.
Issues: Complicity of the petitioner in the fraudulent disbursement of scholarship funds, delay in the investigation, and the need to address similar cases of illegal payments to non-existent institutions.
Ratio Decidendi: The investigation by the investigating agency, rather than the fate of departmental proceedings, is determinative of the complicity of an alleged offender. The court emphasized the need to address the delay in the investigation and take action against all involved in the fraudulent activities.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the case was registered as a criminal PIL. The investigating agency was directed to conclude the investigation within two months, and responses were sought from relevant authorities regarding similar cases and measures to eliminate the menace of non-existent paper schools.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
2. An F.I.R was lodged by Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, Supervisor, Social Welfare Office, Ballia on 9.9.2005 at 2.10 P.M which was registered at case crime No. 102 of 2005, under sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, 406, 409 IPC at Police Station Rewati, district Ballia alleging that between 24.3.2004 and 24.5.2004 one Gopal Singh son of Jai Prakash Singh, Branch Manager, Regional Gramin Bank, Branch Jataha Rewati district Ballia and Basic Shiksha Adhikari opened an account in the said bank in the name of one Akhilesh Kumar Singh, who was shown as Principal Maharana Pratap Junior High School Reoti with the assistance of Basic Shiksha Adhikari. On several dates between 24.3.2004 to 24.5.2004, a sum of money totalling 14.4 lacs was deposited towards minority scholarship amounts, and fictitiously withdrawn by Akhilesh Kumar Singh. Inquiries revealed that the photograph on the account was of the co-accused Gopal Singh, and that Akhilesh Kumar Singh as well as the college were in fact non-existent. The role of the Bank was also doubtful as minority scholarship amounts are to be held under a joint account, but this was a single operating account.
3. This offence was further investigated by Economic Offences Wing, who also found the complicity of the petitioner, who was not named in the FIR but was working as a clerk in the District Social Welfare office, Ballia at the material time and other persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the arrest of co-accused Manoj Kumar Srivastava had been stayed till submission of charge sheet whilst disposing of the matter by another bench in Crl. Writ Petition No. 11405 of 2011 by order dated dated 27.6.2011. The said co-accused was also not named in the FIR like the petitioner against whom a departmental enquiry had been conducted and charge sheet was filed. Further, the main accused Ganesh Prakash had been dismissed from service and another co-accused Keshav Giri had initially been given protection by this Court in Crl. Writ Petition No. 10180 of 2005. Although, learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that Keshav Giri's services had also been terminated, and there was no subsisting order granting protection from arrest to him.
5. So far as the petitioner was concerned, it was contended that in the enquiry conducted by Sri Sunil Kumar Bisen, Deputy Director, Social Welfare, Varanasi Division. ( Annexure-6 to the writ petition) on 19.1.2011 it has been observed that the petitioner, who was a senior clerk had only issued a cheque of Rs. 39360/bearing the forged signature of Minority Welfare Officer, Ballia in favour of the non-existent institution, which had been deposited in the Dataha Revati branch of the Regional Co-operative Bank, Ballia by means of a forged bank invoice. The charge had only been found to be partially proved but as the petitioner had permitted the said amount to be withdrawn from his salary account, his suspension order was revoked and he was reinstated in service. Learned counsel for the petitioner also argued that a greater and direct liability has been imposed on M.K. Srivastava, whose arrest had been stayed by the earlier order of the Division Bench.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for any relief to the petitioner.
6. It may be mentioned that in the order dated 27.6.2011 passed in Crl. Writ Petition No. 11405 of 2011 disposing of the writ petition while staying the arrest of co-accused till submission of charge sheet the bench had observed that at the time of issuance of the initial three cheques, the accused M.K. Srivastava was not posted in the concerned Bank and at the time of preparation of the later three cheques, he was on sanctioned leave and that he should therefore, be held guilty for slackness in maintaining the records.
7. In our view, though reference has been made to departmental proceedings, but it is the investigation by the investigating agency and not the fate of the d
