IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.
Dr. Syed Fareed Haider Rizvi @ Dr. S.F.H. Rizvi – Applicant
Versus
C.B.I. Thru. S.P./A.C.B. Lko - Opposite Party
Application U/S 482 No. 8292 of 2018
Decided On : 29-11-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 120-B, 420, 409 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 173(2), 482 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sections 13(2), 13(1)(d), 19 – Amending Act, 1897 – Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 – Section 6 – Issuing non-bailable warrants of arrest – Criminal Case – Criminal conspiracy – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property – Criminal breach of trust by public servant – Public Interest Litigation Petition – National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme – Subsequent proceedings – Previous sanction necessary for prosecution – Applicant was a public servant, employed/posted as District Development Officer, during relevant time, large scale of financial bungling, gross irregularities and misappropriation of public funds allocated under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme was reported to have been done by then government officers/officials in criminal conspiracy and connivance with private suppliers in purchase of stationery and other materials – Held, Court of considered view that where investigation of an offence has been entrusted to CBI pursuant to order passed by Constitutional Court and role of a public servant comes as an accused for committing such an offence, no prior sanction under Section 19 PC Act would be required for prosecuting such a public servant – Relevant date for applicability of law in respect of a crime would be date of commission of crime – Subsequent amendment in the statute would not govern investigation and prosecution of an accused for an offence which was committed before Amendment in statute came into force – Application rejected.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Nandit Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. J.P. Awasthi and Mr. Mohd. Ibrahim Khan Advocates, representing the applicant as well as Mr. Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent -CBI, and gone through the record.
2. This application under Section 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "CrPC") has been filed, impugning the order dated 13.12.2018, issuing non-bailable warrants of arrest against the applicant in connection with Criminal Case No.1968 of 2018 (CBI Vs. Sachidanand Dubey and others) under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420 and 409 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the "IPC") and Sections 13(2) read with Sections 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "PC Act"), pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Court No. 2, Lucknow, arising out of Crime No. RC0062014A0008 lodged at Police Station CBI/ACB, Lucknow.
3. The applicant was a public servant, employed/posted as District Development Officer, Balrampur during the years 2007 to 2009; at the relevant time, large scale of financial bungling, gross irregularities and misappropriation of public funds allocated under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the "NREGS") was reported to have been done by the then government officers/officials in criminal conspiracy and connivance with the private suppliers in purchase of stationery and other materials.
4. Public Interest Litigation Petition No.12802 (M/B) of 2011 came to be filed by Mr. Sachchidanand Gupta before this Court regarding large scale corruption, bungling and misappropriation of NREGS funds by the Block Development Officers and other government officers/officials in connivance with the private suppliers in the centralized purchase of stationery and other items worth Rs. 1,81,18,602/- on exorbitant price by the then Chief Development Officer, Project Director, D.R.D.A. and other officers of District Balrampur. These government officers/officials and private persons had allegedly caused huge loss to the government exchequer and made corresponding gains to themselves. A prayer was made for registration of the FIR and investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the "CBI").
5. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 31.01.2014 passed Public Interest Litigation Petition No.12802 (M/B) of 2011, issued a Mandamus directing the CBI to investigate the abuse and misappropriation of funds allocated under the NREGS with regard to seven districts of State of Uttar Pradesh, namely, Balrampur, Gonda, Mahoba, Sonbhadra, Sant Kabir Nagar, Mirzapur and Kushinagar during the years 2007 to 2010 and take appropriate action and prosecute the persons involved, in accordance with law.
6. Pursuant to the said order, reports of State Quality Monitor (hereinafter referred to as "SQM") in respect of seven districts, mentioned above, for the relevant period, were examined by the CBI. It was revealed that in District Balrampur during the period 20072008 and 2008-2009 large scale financial bungling, gross irregularities and misappropriation of NREGS funds had been found to have been done by the Block Development Officer and other government officers/officials in connivance with private suppliers in the central purchase of stationery and other items wroth Rs. 1,81,18,602/-on exorbitant price by the then Chief Development Officer, Project Director, D.R.D.A. and other officers of District Balrampur in connivance with the private suppliers and thereby they had caused a huge loss to the government exchequer and made corresponding gains to themselves.
7. A regular case, mentioned above, got registered against the then Chief Development Officer, Project Director and other officers/officials of the District Balrampur along with the private suppliers.
8. The CBI after conducting a thorough investigation, lodged the FIR on
Vinod Kumar Garg v. State (NCT of Delhi)
State of Telangana Vs. Managipet alias Mangipet Sarveshwar Reddy
Prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 PC Act mandatory before directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC or registering FIR against public servant for official duty acts; absenc....
Prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19 PC Act mandatory before directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC or registering FIR against public servant for offences in discharge of o....
Section 197 of CrPC reads as prosecution of Judges and public servants.
Prior sanction is mandatory for prosecuting public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 197 Cr.P.C.
The requirement of prior sanction for prosecution under Sec.19 PC Act applies at the time of taking cognizance of the offence, and the intent behind the provision is to protect public servants from m....
Point of Law : High Court was absolutely right in setting aside the order of the Special Judge. Unlike Section 19 of the PC Act, the protection under Section 197 CrPC is available to the public serva....
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.