ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The applicant before this Court has invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash and set aside the FIR being C.R. No.8 of 2014 registered with the Gandhinagar A.C.B. Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 12, 13(1) (e) and 13(2) and subsequently added Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alongwith the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. The crux of the allegation leveled in the FIR are to the effect that the Police Inspector, A.C.B., Vadodara allegedly received secrete information through his informers that the Dy. Commissioner and a Junior Clerk of Food and Drug Control Administration located in Dr. Jivraj Mehta Bhavan, Block No.8, Gandhinagar, carry amounts received from the applicants in their private car. Hence, it was decided to carry out a raid in that connection.

2.1. Accordingly, on 14.10.2014 the raiding party reached in the parking area in Block No.8, Dr. Jivraj Mehta Bhavan and at around 18:45, one man and woman set in that particular car and at that time the raiding party reached there introduced themselves and questioning both the occupants of that car. The search was carried out of both the occupants and the car by the raiding party. From the hand bag of the applicant an amount of Rs.45,420/- was recovered in connection of which the explanation was sought. That the applicant was unable to give explanation to the satisfaction of the complainant.

2.2. Thereafter other occupant – Rohitkumar Shantilal Chauhan (husband of the applicant) was also searched and an amount of Rs.30,128/- was found. That, on being question about possession of that amount said Rohitkumar was not able to give explanation to the satisfaction of the complainant. In said set of circumstances the FIR came to be lodged.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Hardik H. Dave for applicant would submit that after lodging of the aforesaid FIR, the applicant was detained for interrogation on 14.10.2014 till 15.10.2014 and was permitted to go home and written summons were given to remain present on 16.10.2014. The applicant was interrogated and was again called on 17.10.2014 at 5:00 p.m., the applicant was arrested. That, on 18.10.2014 remand report was submitted for a period of five days, and the remand was granted for a period of two days by an order dated 18.10.2014 by the learned trial Court. Thereafter, the applicant came to be enlarged on regular bail, and thereafter, the investigation was proceeded and the investigating officer submitted a report for adding Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on 05.11.2014. Thereafter, on 21.11.2014, the investigating officer submitted another report for deletion of Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

3.1. It is submitted that there are ample reason to believe that the applicant is being made a scapegoat on account of the strict action taken by the applicant to improve the efficiency of her department. That the investigating agency is not having any independent source of information as narrated in the FIR, but on behest of Managing Director of Jay Formulations Ltd., Ahmedabad, that the present FIR is initiated.

3.2. Learned advocate would further submit that on 17.04.2013, the applicant was given additional charge of Joint Commissioner (Testing) and therefore the Food and Drug Laboratory, Vadodara was placed under her control. That, on account of the active steps taken by the applicant in increasing the efficiency of the staff and the equipments after taking over the charge and the samples which failed in tests, pursuant to which the Jay Formulations company attempted to deter the present applicant from her strict vigil by submitting anonymous letters concerning the applicant, and when such tactics did not work out, started visiting head office of A.C.B. and pursuant to which witch-hunting of the applicant started.

3.3. Learned advocate would further submit that the applicant herein made a repres