Back
2017 Supreme(MP) 807
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sanjay Yadav and S.K. Awasthi, JJ.
R.K. Shukla and another v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petition No. 4080 of 2016 (PIL); with
Writ Petition No. 5503/2016 (Gwalior); Decided on 13.12.2017
Anil Mishra for petitioners; Raghvendra Dixit,
Government Advocate for respondents No. 1/State ; K.L. Gupta,
Special Prosecutor for respondents No. 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Headnote:(1) Lokayukt Evam Up- Lokayukt Adhiniyam, 1981 (M.P.) -- Ss.9(2) and 14 -- all complaints lacking materials or not having sufficient material to launch prosecution -- will not amount to wilful, malicious and false complaint -- prosecution of all such complainants will run counter to stipulations contained in S.14.
Held : In view whereof the relief as sought for by the petitioner for a declaration that Lokayukt and Uplokayukt who in all the cases in which closure report is filed or cognizance has not been taken by the Court on the charge sheet filed before the Court or accused has been discharged or acquitted in a criminal prosecution and the departmental enquiry be prosecuted by invoking, sub-section (2) of section 9 of Adhiniyam, 1981, cannot be acceded to unless it is established that a complaint on the basis whereof the enquiry has been caused by Lokayukt was wilful and infested with malice. In case, if the relief as prayed for by the petitioner is acceded to the same will run counter to the stipulations contained under section 14 and will have cascading effect that a genuine complainant lodging complaint leading the authority to cause an enquiry and investigation thereof will not come forward with the complaint against the functionaries who are covered under the 1981 Act.
(2) Words and Phrases -- wilful -- an act is said to be wilful if it is intentional, conscious and deliberate -- cannot be construed as wilful if it is casual, accidental, bona fide or unintentional. (2006)1 SCC 275 and 1995 Supp. (4) SCC 238 followed [Paras 6 & 8
(3) Words and Phrases -- malicious -- an act is said to be malicious when done with evil design, wilfully, harbouring ill-will or enmity, done not only wilfully and intentionally but out of cruelty, hostility or revenge. The Major Law Lexicon, 4th Edn. and 1956 Nag.264 (AIR V 43 C84 Nov.) relied on. [Para 9
(4) Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- PIL -- close look at pleadings of PIL and writ petition reveals that petitioner is nurturing his personal agenda -- however, issue raised deserves to be adverted at because of larger public interest. (2015)1 SCC 151 referred to. [Para 3
(5) Lokayukt Evam Up-Lokayukt Adhiniyam, 1981 (M.P.) -- Ss.9(2), 13, 14 and 15 -- representation seeking prosecution of unknown complainant for lodging false complaint -- rejected -- cannot be faulted with when tested on anvil of stipulations contained in Ss.14 and 15.
[Para 2 of W.P. No. 5503/2016
¼1½ yksdk;qDr ,oa mi&yksdkqDr vf/kfu;e] 1981 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 9¼2½ rFkk 14 && leLr f'kdk;rsa ftuesa lkexzh dk vHkko gS vFkok vfHk;kstu djus ds fy, i;kZIr lkexzh ugha gS && tkucw>dj] fo}s"kiq.kZ vkSj feF;k f'kdk;r dh dksfV esa ugh vk,xh && ,sls leLRk f'kdk;rdrkZvksa dk vfHk;kstu /kkjk 14 esa varfo"V vuqca/kks ds foijhr tk,xkA
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ftldh n`f"V ls ;kph dh bl ?kks"k.kk dh bZIlk fd mu leLr ekeyksa es] ftuesa lekiu fjiksVZ Qkby dh xbZ gS vFkok U;k;ky; ds le{k Qkby fd, x, vkjksi i= ij U;k;ky; }kjk laKku ugha fy;k x;k gS vFkok nkafM+d vfHk;kstu ;k foHkkxh; tk¡p esa vfHk;qDr mUeksfpr ;k nks"keqDr dj fn;k x;k gS] vf/kfu;e 1981 dh /kkjk 9 dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ dk vkJ; ysdj yksdk;qDr vkSj mi&yksdkqDr¼f'kdk;rdrkZ dk½ vfHk;kstu djs] vaxhdkj ugha dh tk ldrh tc rd fd ;g LFkkfir ugha gks fd ftl f'kdk;r ds vk/kkj ij yksdk;qDr }kjk tkWp dh xbZ og tkucw>dj vkSj fo}s"k ls xzlr gksdj dh xbZ FkhA ;fn ;kph }kjk ;Fkk bZfIlr vuqrks"k vaxhdkj fd;k tkrk gS rks og /kkjk 14 ds v/khu varfoZ"V vuqca/kksa ds foijhr tk,xk rFkk mldk ;g Øeizikrh izHkko gksxk fd fu"diV f'kdk;rdrkZ] ftldh f'kdk;r ij ls izkf/kdkjh }kjk tk¡p vkSj vUos"k.k fd;k tk,xk] mu d`R;dkfj;ksa ds fo:) f'kdk;r ysdj ugha vk,xk tks lu~ 1981 ds vf/kfu;e ds v/khu vkrs gSA
¼2½ 'kCn rFkk okD;ka'k && tkucw>dj && dksbZ d`R; rc tkucw>dj fd;k x;k dgk tkrk gS ;fn og lk'k;] HkkuiwoZd vkSj foef"kZr gS && ;fn og vkdfLed] lka;ksfxd] ln~Hkkfod vFkok vuk'kf;r gS rks mls tkucw>dj fd;k x;k ugha le>k tk ldrkA ¼2006½ 1 ,l lh lh 275 rFkk 1995 ,Iyh-¼4½ ,l lh lh 238 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 6 ,oa 8
¼3½ 'kCn rFkk okD;ka'k && fo}s"kiw.kZ && dksbZ d`R; rc fo}s"kiw.kZ dgk tkrk gS tc og vfu"Vdj mnns'; ls] tkucw>dj] nqHkkZouk ;k 'k=qrk eu esa j[k dj] dsoy tkucw>dj vkSj lk'k; gh ugha vfirq Øwjrk] cSj ;k izfr'kks/k ds dkj.k fd;k x;k gksA n esatj ykW ySfDldu] prqFkZ laLdj.k rFkk 1956 ukx-264 ¼, vkb vkj ikWp 43 lh 84 uo-½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 9
¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq-226 && yksdfgr eqdnek && yksdfgr eqdnes vkSj fjV ;kfpdk ds vfHkopuksa ds lw{e voyksdu ls izdV gS fd ;kph vius O;fDrxr dk;ZØe dk ifjiks"k.k dj jgk gS && rFkkfi] c`gŸkj yksdfgr ds dkj.k] mBk;k x;k fookn /;ku nsus ;ksX; gSA ¼2015½ 1 ,l lh lh 151 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 3
¼5½ yksdk;qDr ,oa mi&yksdkqDr vf/kfu;e] 1981 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 9¼2½] 13] 14 rFkk 15 feF;k f'kdk;r djus ds fy, vKkr f'kdk;rdrkZ ds vfHk;kstu dh bZIlk dk vH;kosnu && ukaetwj && /kkjk 14 rFkk 15 dh dlkSVh ij ij[kus ij mlesa xyrh ugha fudkyh tk ldrhA ¼fj-;k-Ø- 5503@2016 dk iSjk 2
Yadav, J. -- 1. This order shall lead to final disposal of writ petition No.4080/2016(PIL) and 5503/2016. Whereas Writ Petition No. 4080/2016 is a Public Interest Litigation whereby the petitioner, an Assistant Engineer working with Public Works Department, State of Madhya Pradesh, along with a practicing Advocate seeks following directions :
“(i) Issuing an appropriate writ or direction thereby directing the Lokayukt and Up-Lokayukt to take care of the impact and give effect to the provisions of section 9(2) of M.P. Lokayukt Evam Up-Lokayukt Adhiniyam, 1981 against the complainant in the cases in which the FR (Closure Report) is filed or cognizance has not been taken by the Court on the charge sheet filed before the Court or accused has been discharged or the accused has been acquitted by the trial Court or appellate Court and in departmental inquires in which the accused is found innocent, furtherance they may be directed to invoke the aforesaid provisions of section 9(2) of Adhiniyam for the complaints received since January, 2005 to till date and in future also, as per the outcome of the complaint.
(ii) The Lokayukt and Up-Lokayukt may also be directed to initiate the proceedings as per the intention of the Legislature within a period of three months and accordingly submit the progress report in consolidated manner before this Hon'ble Court within the aforesaid period.
(iii) The Lokayukt and Up-Lokayukt may further be directed to mention the aforesaid exercise and initiation of the proceedings in the annual report to be submitted under section 12(4) before the Governor of the State and in future also they may be directed to continue the same.”
2. That Writ Petition No. 5503/2016 filed by the petitioner in his personal capacity is directed against the order dated 15.4.2015, whereby representation preferred by the petitioner invoking sub-section (2) of section 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Lokayukta and U.P. Lokayukta Adhiniyam 1981 has been rejected.
3. A close look of the pleadings in both the petitions, i.e. the Public Interest Litigation and the writ petition reveals that they emanate from the grievance nurtured by the petitioner with the dismissal of his representation preferred by him under sub-section (2) of section 9 of Adhiniyam 1981. Though true it is that even a Government servant can be a whistle blower [(2015)1 SCC 151]. However, in the present case, the petitioner is nurturing his personal agenda, which cannot be permitted to be carried forward at the instance of the petitioner. However, the issue raised in the petition deserves to be adverted at, because of larger public interest.
4. The contention that lacs of Government employees are subjected to complaints and the enquiry by the Lokayukta; however, no action is taken by the Lokayukta against such complainants whose complaints are find merit-less. Though the proposition is attractive in the first blush; however, on a further examination, it is noticed that sub-section (2) of section 9 of 1981 Act aims for the action against every person who wilfully or maliciously makes any false complaint under the Act of 1981. It stipulates :
“(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 10 or any other provision of the Act every person who wilfully or maliciously makes any false complaint under this Act shall, on conviction be punished with rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both and the Court may order that out of the amount of fine, such sum as it may deem fit be paid by way of compensation to the person against whom such complaint was made.”
5. What is wilful, malicious or false complaint?
6. An act is said to be wilful if it is intentional, conscious and deliberate. In State of Orissa v. Md. Illiyas, (2006)1 SCC 275, it is held by Their Lordship :
“9. At this juncture it is desirable to consider the true import of the word “wilful”. An act is said to be “wilful” if it is intentio
