Back
2010 Supreme(MP) 1226
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
ARUN MISHRA, S. C. SINHO, JJ.
JUGAL KISHORE BAGRI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 3172, M.Cr.C. No. 2906 of 2007 with Cr. R. No. 1702 and Cr. R. No. 1778 of 2007
Decided On : 28-07-2010
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S. C. Datt,Anil Khare , G. P. Patel , Pratyush Tripathi
For the Respondent: Aditya Adhikari
The main legal point established is that in certain circumstances, no sanction is necessary under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code for specific offenses.
Headnote:
Corruption - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - 13(1)(d) - 13(2) - 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 511/34 of Indian Penal Code - 6 of M. P. Lok Seva (Anusuchit Jatiyon, Anusuchit Janjatiyon Aur Anya Pichhade Vargon Ke Liye Aarakshan) Adhiniyam, 1994
Fact of the Case:
The case involved charges against Jugal Kishore Bagri and Ganesh Singh for offenses under various sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Indian Penal Code, and M. P. Lok Seva Adhiniyam, 1994. The petitioners sought to quash the charge-sheet and framing of charges by the Special Judge, Satna.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no sanction was necessary under the Prevention of Corruption Act and M. P. Lok Seva Adhiniyam, 1994. It also held that no sanction was required for offenses under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 511 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners required sanction under the relevant acts for the charges against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that no sanction was necessary under the Prevention of Corruption Act and M. P. Lok Seva Adhiniyam, 1994. It also ruled that no sanction was required for certain offenses under the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The petitions were dismissed, and the Special Judge was directed to expedite the trial.
JUDGMENT :
ARUN MISHRA, J.
1. In these matters the question involved is the same, hence they are being decided by this common order. In M.Cr.C. No. 3172/2007 and Cr. R. No. 1702/2007, petitioner is Jugal Kishore Bagri and in M.Cr.C. No. 2906/2007 and Cr. R. No. 1778/2007, petitioner is Ganesh Singh.
2. A prosecution has been filed against Jugal Kishore Bagri and Ganesh Singh for commission of offence under section 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 511/34 of Indian Penal Code and section 6 of M. P. Lok Seva (Anusuchit Jatiyon, Anusuchit Janjatiyon Aur Anya Pichhade Vargon Ke Liye Aarakshan) Adhiniyam, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as Adhiniyam, 1994).
3. Offence relates back to the period June, 1998 to September, 1998. Shri Jugal Kishore Bagri was a Member of Legislative Assembly for the period 3-1-1995 to 6-1-2000. By virtue of holding said office of Legislative Assembly, he entered in the office of Education Committee of District Panchayat, Satna. He was member of said committee w.e.f. 13-1-1995 till 6-1-2000. He was elected as Member of Legislative Assembly initially w.e.f. 7-12-1993 to 1-12-1998 and thereafter he was re-elected as Member of Legislative Assembly on 1-12-1998 till 5-12-2003 and entered the office of Member of Legislative Assembly again w.e.f. 5-12-2003 till the date of filing of the charge-sheet on 18-1-2007. It is also submitted that he had entered the office of Education Committee w.e.f. 4-4-2000 to 28-2-2005 and thereafter from 25-1-2006 he became Member of Administrative Committee and Works Committee of District Panchayat by virtue of holding the office of Member of Legislative Assembly. On 18-1-2000, an additional charge-sheet was filed against him. Sanction was applied for, which was refused by the Speaker of erstwhile Vidhansabha.
4. Shri Ganesh Singh at the relevant time when offence in question was committed, was elected Member of District Panchayat. By virtue of elected Member of District Panchayat, he was a member of Selection Committee appointed for the purpose of selection of Shiksha Karmis. He was ceased to be the Member of said District Panchayat, thereafter re-elected as Member of Parliament. After the said tenure is over, he has again was re-elected as Member of Parliament. He remained member of District Panchayat till 10-9-2004 and on 13-5-2004 he was elected as Member of Parliament. Then he was co-opted as Member of General Administration Committee of District Panchayat.
5. Petitions under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code have been filed by the petitioners to quash the charge-sheet and order dated 17-3-2007 passed by Special Judge, Satna in Special Case No. 7/2004. In Criminal Revisions, same set of petitioners have assailed order dated 20-8-2007 whereby charges have been framed by the Special Judge, Satna.
6. Shri S. C. Datt, learned Sr. Counsel along with Shri Anil Khare, Shri G. P. Patel and Shri Pratyush Tripathi for petitioners have submitted that in discharge of the duty as public servant, the act was done, the sanction under section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code was required to be obtained. Apart from that the petitioners continue to hold the office of Member of Committee of District Panchayat by virtue of their election as people's representative. The sanction under section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act was also necessary to be obtained as well as under section 6 of Adhiniyam, 1994. Thus the charge-sheet could not have been filed without obtaining requisite sanction, neither the petitioners could have been put to trial by framing the charges.
7. Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned counsel appearing for respondents has submitted that under section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act, it was not necessary to obtain any sanction as the petitioners cease to hold the office of their being members of the Committee. In case they have entered in another office or re-elected to the same office for different tenur
